Articles | Volume 23, issue 10
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 4323–4331, 2019
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-4323-2019
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 4323–4331, 2019
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-4323-2019

Technical note 25 Oct 2019

Technical note | 25 Oct 2019

Technical note: Inherent benchmark or not? Comparing Nash–Sutcliffe and Kling–Gupta efficiency scores

Wouter J. M. Knoben et al.

Download

Interactive discussion

Status: closed
Status: closed
AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment
Printer-friendly Version - Printer-friendly version Supplement - Supplement

Peer-review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision
ED: Publish subject to minor revisions (further review by editor) (29 Aug 2019) by Nunzio Romano
AR by Wouter Knoben on behalf of the Authors (06 Sep 2019)  Author's response    Manuscript
ED: Publish as is (22 Sep 2019) by Nunzio Romano
Download
Short summary
The accuracy of model simulations can be quantified with so-called efficiency metrics. The Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE) has been often used in hydrology, but recently the Kling–Gupta efficiency (KGE) is gaining in popularity. We show that lessons learned about which NSE scores are acceptable do not necessarily translate well into understanding of the KGE metric.