Articles | Volume 25, issue 2
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 1069–1095, 2021
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-1069-2021
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 1069–1095, 2021
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-1069-2021

Research article 02 Mar 2021

Research article | 02 Mar 2021

Behind the scenes of streamflow model performance

Laurène J. E. Bouaziz et al.

Related authors

The importance of ecosystem adaptation on hydrological model predictions in response to climate change
Laurène J. E. Bouaziz, Emma E. Aalbers, Albrecht H. Weerts, Mark Hegnauer, Hendrik Buiteveld, Rita Lammersen, Jasper Stam, Eric Sprokkereef, Hubert H. G. Savenije, and Markus Hrachowitz
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2021-204,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2021-204, 2021
Preprint under review for HESS
Short summary
Redressing the balance: quantifying net intercatchment groundwater flows
Laurène Bouaziz, Albrecht Weerts, Jaap Schellekens, Eric Sprokkereef, Jasper Stam, Hubert Savenije, and Markus Hrachowitz
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 6415–6434, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-6415-2018,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-6415-2018, 2018
Short summary
Looking beyond general metrics for model comparison – lessons from an international model intercomparison study
Tanja de Boer-Euser, Laurène Bouaziz, Jan De Niel, Claudia Brauer, Benjamin Dewals, Gilles Drogue, Fabrizio Fenicia, Benjamin Grelier, Jiri Nossent, Fernando Pereira, Hubert Savenije, Guillaume Thirel, and Patrick Willems
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 423–440, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-423-2017,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-423-2017, 2017
Short summary

Related subject area

Subject: Catchment hydrology | Techniques and Approaches: Modelling approaches
Effects of spatial resolution of terrain models on modelled discharge and soil loss in Oaxaca, Mexico
Sergio Naranjo, Francelino A. Rodrigues Jr., Georg Cadisch, Santiago Lopez-Ridaura, Mariela Fuentes Ponce, and Carsten Marohn
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 5561–5588, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-5561-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-5561-2021, 2021
Short summary
Benchmarking data-driven rainfall–runoff models in Great Britain: a comparison of long short-term memory (LSTM)-based models with four lumped conceptual models
Thomas Lees, Marcus Buechel, Bailey Anderson, Louise Slater, Steven Reece, Gemma Coxon, and Simon J. Dadson
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 5517–5534, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-5517-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-5517-2021, 2021
Short summary
Numerical daemons of hydrological models are summoned by extreme precipitation
Peter T. La Follette, Adriaan J. Teuling, Nans Addor, Martyn Clark, Koen Jansen, and Lieke A. Melsen
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 5425–5446, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-5425-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-5425-2021, 2021
Short summary
How is Baseflow Index (BFI) impacted by water resource management practices?
John P. Bloomfield, Mengyi Gong, Benjamin P. Marchant, Gemma Coxon, and Nans Addor
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 5355–5379, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-5355-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-5355-2021, 2021
Short summary
Technical note: RAT – a robustness assessment test for calibrated and uncalibrated hydrological models
Pierre Nicolle, Vazken Andréassian, Paul Royer-Gaspard, Charles Perrin, Guillaume Thirel, Laurent Coron, and Léonard Santos
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 5013–5027, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-5013-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-5013-2021, 2021
Short summary

Cited articles

Addor, N. and Melsen, L. A.: Legacy, Rather Than Adequacy, Drives the Selection of Hydrological Models, Water Resour. Res., 55, 378–390, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018WR022958, 2019. a
Adnan, M., Merwade, V., and Yu, Z.: Multi-objective calibration of a hydrologic model using spatially distributed remotely sensed/in-situ soil moisture, J. Hydrol., 536, 192–207, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2016.02.037, 2016. a
Albergel, C., Rüdiger, C., Pellarin, T., Calvet, J.-C., Fritz, N., Froissard, F., Suquia, D., Petitpa, A., Piguet, B., and Martin, E.: From near-surface to root-zone soil moisture using an exponential filter: an assessment of the method based on in-situ observations and model simulations, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 12, 1323–1337, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-12-1323-2008, 2008. a
Alcamo, J., Döll, P., Henrichs, T., Kaspar, F., Lehner, B., Rösch, T., and Siebert, S.: Development and testing of the WaterGAP 2 global model of water use and availability, Hydrolog. Sci. J., 48, 317–338, https://doi.org/10.1623/hysj.48.3.317.45290, 2003. a
Andréassian, V., Le Moine, N., Perrin, C., Ramos, M. H., Oudin, L., Mathevet, T., Lerat, J., and Berthet, L.: All that glitters is not gold: The case of calibrating hydrological models, Hydrol. Process., 26, 2206–2210, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.9264, 2012. a
Download
Short summary
We quantify the differences in internal states and fluxes of 12 process-based models with similar streamflow performance and assess their plausibility using remotely sensed estimates of evaporation, snow cover, soil moisture and total storage anomalies. The dissimilarities in internal process representation imply that these models cannot all simultaneously be close to reality. Therefore, we invite modelers to evaluate their models using multiple variables and to rely on multi-model studies.