Relative effects of statistical preprocessing and postprocessing  on a regional hydrological ensemble prediction system

Sharma, Sanjib; Siddique, Ridwan; Reed, Seann; Ahnert, Peter; Mendoza, Pablo; Mejia, Alfonso

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-1831-2018

Articles | Volume 22, issue 3

https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-1831-2018

© Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-1831-2018

© Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Articles | Volume 22, issue 3

Research article

|

13 Mar 2018

Research article |

| 13 Mar 2018

Relative effects of statistical preprocessing and postprocessing on a regional hydrological ensemble prediction system

Sanjib Sharma, Ridwan Siddique, Seann Reed, Peter Ahnert, Pablo Mendoza, and Alfonso Mejia

Download

Final revised paper (published on 13 Mar 2018)
Preprint (discussion started on 06 Sep 2017)

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment

- Printer-friendly version

- Supplement

RC1: 'Interesting paper but part of the verification methodology is scientifically problematic and needs to be revised', Michael Scheuerer, 13 Sep 2017
- AC1: 'Response to the reviewers' comments', Sanjib Sharma, 18 Nov 2017
RC2: 'Referee comments', Anonymous Referee #2, 29 Sep 2017
- AC2: 'Response to the reviewers' comments', Sanjib Sharma, 18 Nov 2017
RC3: 'Review of “Relative effects of statistical preprocessing and postprocessing on a regional hydrological ensemble prediction system” by Sanjib Sharma et al', Anonymous Referee #3, 03 Oct 2017
- AC3: 'Response to the reviewers' comments', Sanjib Sharma, 18 Nov 2017

Peer-review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision

ED: Reconsider after major revisions (further review by editor and referees) (27 Nov 2017) by Shraddhanand Shukla

Dear Authors,

Thank you for carefully responding to the reviewers comments. I encourage you to submit a revised manuscript based on your submitted response. I also have some suggestions/comments regarding your response which you can find below.

Best,
Shrad

(1) Please do not exclude the summary/general statements ( the first paragraph) made by the reviewers from your response. Please submit a revised version of your response that includes summary statements made by each of the reviewers.

(2) Reviewer #2, Comment #4: I do not think that dropping climate variability from this statement is fair. My suggestion would be to say something to the affect that both climate variability and climate change contribute to increased exposure increased exposure from expanding urbanization, and sea level rise are increasing.

(3) Reviewer #2, Comment #10: Please specify here which comment of the reviewer #1 is similar to this comment, which you have already responded.

(4) Reviewer #2, Comment #11: It is not clear to me how the revised sentence add any clarity. My guess is that the reviewer would like you to be more specific about the metric score use for making this statement and perhaps also mention if the reliability improves for certain category of events.

(5) Reviewer #3, Comment #1: Please provide an reference or example for your statement "since this is a temporal resolution commonly used in operational forecasting in the U.S."

(6) Reviewer #3, Comment #4: I am not satisfied with this response, my guess would be that the reviewer may not be either. Why highlight the difference in the model structure if it has no bearing on your results? Also there are of course other previous studies that have used distributed models.

(7) Reviewer #3, Comment #9: Please make sure to provide more details regarding the forcing. For example please briefly mention the method, sources of observations (e.g. station or satellite or both?), which other studies have used the data before and how it was validated.

Hide

AR by Sanjib Sharma on behalf of the Authors (07 Dec 2017) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (14 Dec 2017) by Shraddhanand Shukla

RR by Michael Scheuerer (15 Dec 2017)

RR by Anonymous Referee #2 (07 Jan 2018)

ED: Publish subject to minor revisions (review by editor) (26 Jan 2018) by Shraddhanand Shukla

AR by Sanjib Sharma on behalf of the Authors (29 Jan 2018) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Publish as is (16 Feb 2018) by Shraddhanand Shukla

AR by Sanjib Sharma on behalf of the Authors (16 Feb 2018) Manuscript

Short summary

We investigate the relative roles of statistical weather preprocessing and streamflow postprocessing in hydrological ensemble forecasting at short- to medium-range forecast lead times (day 1–7). For this purpose, we develop and implement a regional hydrologic ensemble prediction system (RHEPS). Overall analysis shows that implementing both preprocessing and postprocessing ensures the most skill improvements, but postprocessing alone can often be a competitive alternative.