Articles | Volume 21, issue 7
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-3427-2017
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-3427-2017
Review article
 | 
11 Jul 2017
Review article |  | 11 Jul 2017

The evolution of process-based hydrologic models: historical challenges and the collective quest for physical realism

Martyn P. Clark, Marc F. P. Bierkens, Luis Samaniego, Ross A. Woods, Remko Uijlenhoet, Katrina E. Bennett, Valentijn R. N. Pauwels, Xitian Cai, Andrew W. Wood, and Christa D. Peters-Lidard

Related authors

On the choice of calibration metrics for “high-flow” estimation using hydrologic models
Naoki Mizukami, Oldrich Rakovec, Andrew J. Newman, Martyn P. Clark, Andrew W. Wood, Hoshin V. Gupta, and Rohini Kumar
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 2601–2614, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-2601-2019,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-2601-2019, 2019
Short summary
Joint editorial: Invigorating hydrological research through journal publications
Nevil Quinn, Günter Blöschl, András Bárdossy, Attilio Castellarin, Martyn Clark, Christophe Cudennec, Demetris Koutsoyiannis, Upmanu Lall, Lubomir Lichner, Juraj Parajka, Christa D. Peters-Lidard, Graham Sander, Hubert Savenije, Keith Smettem, Harry Vereecken, Alberto Viglione, Patrick Willems, Andy Wood, Ross Woods, Chong-Yu Xu, and Erwin Zehe
Proc. IAHS, 380, 3–8, https://doi.org/10.5194/piahs-380-3-2018,https://doi.org/10.5194/piahs-380-3-2018, 2018
ESM-SnowMIP: assessing snow models and quantifying snow-related climate feedbacks
Gerhard Krinner, Chris Derksen, Richard Essery, Mark Flanner, Stefan Hagemann, Martyn Clark, Alex Hall, Helmut Rott, Claire Brutel-Vuilmet, Hyungjun Kim, Cécile B. Ménard, Lawrence Mudryk, Chad Thackeray, Libo Wang, Gabriele Arduini, Gianpaolo Balsamo, Paul Bartlett, Julia Boike, Aaron Boone, Frédérique Chéruy, Jeanne Colin, Matthias Cuntz, Yongjiu Dai, Bertrand Decharme, Jeff Derry, Agnès Ducharne, Emanuel Dutra, Xing Fang, Charles Fierz, Josephine Ghattas, Yeugeniy Gusev, Vanessa Haverd, Anna Kontu, Matthieu Lafaysse, Rachel Law, Dave Lawrence, Weiping Li, Thomas Marke, Danny Marks, Martin Ménégoz, Olga Nasonova, Tomoko Nitta, Masashi Niwano, John Pomeroy, Mark S. Raleigh, Gerd Schaedler, Vladimir Semenov, Tanya G. Smirnova, Tobias Stacke, Ulrich Strasser, Sean Svenson, Dmitry Turkov, Tao Wang, Nander Wever, Hua Yuan, Wenyan Zhou, and Dan Zhu
Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 5027–5049, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-5027-2018,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-5027-2018, 2018
Short summary
Joint editorial: Invigorating hydrological research through journal publications
Nevil Quinn, Günter Blöschl, András Bárdossy, Attilio Castellarin, Martyn Clark, Christophe Cudennec, Demetris Koutsoyiannis, Upmanu Lall, Lubomir Lichner, Juraj Parajka, Christa D. Peters-Lidard, Graham Sander, Hubert Savenije, Keith Smettem, Harry Vereecken, Alberto Viglione, Patrick Willems, Andy Wood, Ross Woods, Chong-Yu Xu, and Erwin Zehe
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 5735–5739, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-5735-2018,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-5735-2018, 2018
Mapping (dis)agreement in hydrologic projections
Lieke A. Melsen, Nans Addor, Naoki Mizukami, Andrew J. Newman, Paul J. J. F. Torfs, Martyn P. Clark, Remko Uijlenhoet, and Adriaan J. Teuling
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 1775–1791, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-1775-2018,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-1775-2018, 2018
Short summary

Related subject area

Subject: Catchment hydrology | Techniques and Approaches: Modelling approaches
Karst aquifer discharge response to rainfall interpreted as anomalous transport
Dan Elhanati, Nadine Goeppert, and Brian Berkowitz
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 4239–4249, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-4239-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-4239-2024, 2024
Short summary
HESS Opinions: Never train a Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) network on a single basin
Frederik Kratzert, Martin Gauch, Daniel Klotz, and Grey Nearing
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 4187–4201, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-4187-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-4187-2024, 2024
Short summary
Large-sample hydrology – a few camels or a whole caravan?
Franziska Clerc-Schwarzenbach, Giovanni Selleri, Mattia Neri, Elena Toth, Ilja van Meerveld, and Jan Seibert
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 4219–4237, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-4219-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-4219-2024, 2024
Short summary
Comment on “Are soils overrated in hydrology?” by Gao et al. (2023)
Ying Zhao, Mehdi Rahmati, Harry Vereecken, and Dani Or
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 4059–4063, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-4059-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-4059-2024, 2024
Short summary
Multi-decadal fluctuations in root zone storage capacity through vegetation adaptation to hydro-climatic variability have minor effects on the hydrological response in the Neckar River basin, Germany
Siyuan Wang, Markus Hrachowitz, and Gerrit Schoups
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 4011–4033, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-4011-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-4011-2024, 2024
Short summary

Cited articles

Ajami, H., Khan, U., Tuteja, N. K., and Sharma, A.: Development of a computationally efficient semi-distributed hydrologic modeling application for soil moisture, lateral flow and runoff simulation, Environ. Modell. Softw., 85, 319–331, 2016.
Ambroise, B., Freer, J., and Beven, K.: Application of a generalized TOPMODEL to the small Ringelbach catchment, Vosges, France, Water Resour. Res., 32, 2147–2159, https://doi.org/10.1029/95wr03715, 1996.
Balsamo, G., Pappenberger, F., Dutra, E., Viterbo, P., and van den Hurk, B.: A revised land hydrology in the ECMWF model: a step towards daily water flux prediction in a fully-closed water cycle, Hydrol. Process., 25, 1046–1054, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.7808, 2011.
Baroni, G., Zink, M., Kumar, R., Samaniego, L., and Attinger, S.: Effects of uncertainty in soil properties on simulated hydrological states and fluxes at different spatio-temporal scales, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 2301–2320, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-2301-2017, 2017.
Berne, A., Uijlenhoet, R., and Troch, P. A.: Similarity analysis of subsurface flow response of hillslopes with complex geometry, Water Resour. Res., 41, 9, https://doi.org/10.1029/2004WR003629, 2005.
Download
Short summary
The diversity in hydrologic models has led to controversy surrounding the “correct” approach to hydrologic modeling. In this paper we revisit key modeling challenges on requirements to (1) define suitable model equations, (2) define adequate model parameters, and (3) cope with limitations in computing power. We outline the historical modeling challenges, summarize modeling advances that address these challenges, and define outstanding research needs.