Articles | Volume 23, issue 6
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-2601-2019
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-2601-2019
Research article
 | 
17 Jun 2019
Research article |  | 17 Jun 2019

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

Related authors

To what extent does river routing matter in hydrological modeling?
Nicolás Cortés-Salazar, Nicolás Vásquez, Naoki Mizukami, Pablo A. Mendoza, and Ximena Vargas
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 27, 3505–3524, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-3505-2023,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-3505-2023, 2023
Short summary
CREST-VEC: a framework towards more accurate and realistic flood simulation across scales
Zhi Li, Shang Gao, Mengye Chen, Jonathan Gourley, Naoki Mizukami, and Yang Hong
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 6181–6196, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-6181-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-6181-2022, 2022
Short summary
Revisiting parameter sensitivities in the variable infiltration capacity model across a hydroclimatic gradient
Ulises M. Sepúlveda, Pablo A. Mendoza, Naoki Mizukami, and Andrew J. Newman
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 3419–3445, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-3419-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-3419-2022, 2022
Short summary
Evaluating a reservoir parametrization in the vector-based global routing model mizuRoute (v2.0.1) for Earth system model coupling
Inne Vanderkelen, Shervan Gharari, Naoki Mizukami, Martyn P. Clark, David M. Lawrence, Sean Swenson, Yadu Pokhrel, Naota Hanasaki, Ann van Griensven, and Wim Thiery
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 4163–4192, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-4163-2022,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-4163-2022, 2022
Short summary
Flood spatial coherence, triggers, and performance in hydrological simulations: large-sample evaluation of four streamflow-calibrated models
Manuela I. Brunner, Lieke A. Melsen, Andrew W. Wood, Oldrich Rakovec, Naoki Mizukami, Wouter J. M. Knoben, and Martyn P. Clark
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 105–119, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-105-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-105-2021, 2021
Short summary

Related subject area

Subject: Catchment hydrology | Techniques and Approaches: Modelling approaches
Enhancing long short-term memory (LSTM)-based streamflow prediction with a spatially distributed approach
Qiutong Yu, Bryan A. Tolson, Hongren Shen, Ming Han, Juliane Mai, and Jimmy Lin
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 2107–2122, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-2107-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-2107-2024, 2024
Short summary
Broadleaf afforestation impacts on terrestrial hydrology insignificant compared to climate change in Great Britain
Marcus Buechel, Louise Slater, and Simon Dadson
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 2081–2105, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-2081-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-2081-2024, 2024
Short summary
Impacts of spatiotemporal resolutions of precipitation on flood event simulation based on multimodel structures – a case study over the Xiang River basin in China
Qian Zhu, Xiaodong Qin, Dongyang Zhou, Tiantian Yang, and Xinyi Song
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 1665–1686, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-1665-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-1665-2024, 2024
Short summary
A network approach for multiscale catchment classification using traits
Fabio Ciulla and Charuleka Varadharajan
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 1617–1651, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-1617-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-1617-2024, 2024
Short summary
Multi-model approach in a variable spatial framework for streamflow simulation
Cyril Thébault, Charles Perrin, Vazken Andréassian, Guillaume Thirel, Sébastien Legrand, and Olivier Delaigue
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 1539–1566, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-1539-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-1539-2024, 2024
Short summary

Cited articles

Addor, N., Newman, A., Mizukami, N., and Clark, M.: The CAMELS data set: catchment attributes and meteorology for large-sample studies, https://doi.org/10.5065/D6G73C3Q, 2017a. a, b
Addor, N., Newman, A. J., Mizukami, N., and Clark, M. P.: The CAMELS data set: catchment attributes and meteorology for large-sample studies, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 5293–5313, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-5293-2017, 2017b. a
Berghuijs, W. R., Woods, R. A., Hutton, C. J., and Sivapalan, M.: Dominant flood generating mechanisms across the United States, Geophys. Res. Lett., 43, 4382–4390, https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL068070, 2016. a
Bergström, S.: The HBV model, in: Compute Models of Watershed Hydrology, edited by: Singh, V., chap. The HBV mo, Water Resouces Publications, Highlands Ranch Co., 1995. a
Bourgin, F., Andréassian, V., Perrin, C., and Oudin, L.: Transferring global uncertainty estimates from gauged to ungauged catchments, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 19, 2535–2546, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-19-2535-2015, 2015. a
Download
Short summary
We find that Nash–Sutcliffe (NSE)-based model calibrations result in poor reproduction of high-flow events, such as the annual peak flows that are used for flood frequency estimation. The use of Kling–Gupta efficiency (KGE) results in annual peak flow estimates that are better than from NSE, with only a slight degradation in performance with respect to other related metrics.