Articles | Volume 25, issue 11
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-5703-2021
© Author(s) 2021. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-5703-2021
© Author(s) 2021. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Technical note
| 
08 Nov 2021
Technical note |
| 08 Nov 2021
| 08 Nov 2021
Technical note: PMR – a proxy metric to assess hydrological model robustness in a changing climate
Paul Royer-Gaspard
Université Paris-Saclay, INRAE, HYCAR Research Unit, 92761 Antony, France
Vazken Andréassian
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Université Paris-Saclay, INRAE, HYCAR Research Unit, 92761 Antony, France
Guillaume Thirel
Université Paris-Saclay, INRAE, HYCAR Research Unit, 92761 Antony, France
Related authors
Eva Sebok, Hans Jørgen Henriksen, Ernesto Pastén-Zapata, Peter Berg, Guillaume Thirel, Anthony Lemoine, Andrea Lira-Loarca, Christiana Photiadou, Rafael Pimentel, Paul Royer-Gaspard, Erik Kjellström, Jens Hesselbjerg Christensen, Jean Philippe Vidal, Philippe Lucas-Picher, Markus G. Donat, Giovanni Besio, María José Polo, Simon Stisen, Yvan Caballero, Ilias G. Pechlivanidis, Lars Troldborg, and Jens Christian Refsgaard
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 5605–5625, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-5605-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-5605-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Hydrological models projecting the impact of changing climate carry a lot of uncertainty. Thus, these models usually have a multitude of simulations using different future climate data. This study used the subjective opinion of experts to assess which climate and hydrological models are the most likely to correctly predict climate impacts, thereby easing the computational burden. The experts could select more likely hydrological models, while the climate models were deemed equally probable.
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
Short summary
In this note, a new method (RAT) is proposed to assess the robustness of hydrological models. The RAT method is particularly interesting because it does not require multiple calibrations (it is therefore applicable to uncalibrated models), and it can be used to determine whether a hydrological model may be safely used for climate change impact studies. Success at the robustness assessment test is a necessary (but not sufficient) condition of model robustness.
Guillaume Evin, Benoit Hingray, Guillaume Thirel, Agnès Ducharne, Laurent Strohmenger, Lola Corre, Yves Tramblay, Jean-Philippe Vidal, Jérémie Bonneau, François Colleoni, Joël Gailhard, Florence Habets, Frédéric Hendrickx, Louis Héraut, Peng Huang, Matthieu Le Lay, Claire Magand, Paola Marson, Céline Monteil, Simon Munier, Alix Reverdy, Jean-Michel Soubeyroux, Yoann Robin, Jean-Pierre Vergnes, Mathieu Vrac, and Eric Sauquet
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2727, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2727, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Hydrology and Earth System Sciences (HESS).
Short summary
Short summary
Explore2 provides hydrological projections for 1,735 French catchments. Using QUALYPSO, this study assesses uncertainties, including internal variability. By the end of the century, low flows are projected to decline in southern France under high emissions, while other indicators remain uncertain. Emission scenarios and regional climate models are key uncertainty sources. Internal variability is often as large as climate-driven changes.
Taha-Abderrahman El Ouahabi, François Bourgin, Charles Perrin, and Vazken Andréassian
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3586, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3586, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Hydrology and Earth System Sciences (HESS).
Short summary
Short summary
To improve hydrological uncertainty estimation, recent studies have explored machine learning (ML)-based post-processing approaches. Among these, quantile random forests (QRF) are increasingly used for their balance between interpretability and performance. We develop a hydrologically informed QRF trained in a multi-site setting. Our results show that the regional QRF approach is beneficial, particularly in catchments where local information is insufficient.
Eric Sauquet, Guillaume Evin, Sonia Siauve, Ryma Aissat, Patrick Arnaud, Maud Bérel, Jérémie Bonneau, Flora Branger, Yvan Caballero, François Colléoni, Agnès Ducharne, Joël Gailhard, Florence Habets, Frédéric Hendrickx, Louis Héraut, Benoît Hingray, Peng Huang, Tristan Jaouen, Alexis Jeantet, Sandra Lanini, Matthieu Le Lay, Claire Magand, Louise Mimeau, Céline Monteil, Simon Munier, Charles Perrin, Olivier Robelin, Fabienne Rousset, Jean-Michel Soubeyroux, Laurent Strohmenger, Guillaume Thirel, Flore Tocquer, Yves Tramblay, Jean-Pierre Vergnes, and Jean-Philippe Vidal
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1788, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1788, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Hydrology and Earth System Sciences (HESS).
Short summary
Short summary
The Explore2 project has provided an unprecedented set of hydrological projections in terms of the number of hydrological models used and the spatial and temporal resolution. The results have been made available through various media. Under the high-emission scenario, the hydrological models mostly agree on the decrease in seasonal flows in the south of France, confirming its hotspot status, and on the decrease in summer flows throughout France, with the exception of the northern part of France.
Yves Tramblay, Guillaume Thirel, Laurent Strohmenger, Guillaume Evin, Lola Corre, Louis Heraut, and Eric Sauquet
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1635, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1635, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
How climate change impacts floods in France? Using simulations for 3000 rivers in climate projections, results show that flood trends vary depending on the region. In the north, floods may become more severe, but in many other areas, the trends are mixed. Floods from intense rainfall are becoming more frequent, while snowmelt floods are strongly decreasing. Overall, the study shows that understanding what causes floods is key to predicting how they are likely to change with the climate.
Olivier Delaigue, Guilherme Mendoza Guimarães, Pierre Brigode, Benoît Génot, Charles Perrin, Jean-Michel Soubeyroux, Bruno Janet, Nans Addor, and Vazken Andréassian
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 17, 1461–1479, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-17-1461-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-17-1461-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This dataset covers 654 rivers all flowing in France. The provided time series and catchment attributes will be of interest to those modelers wishing to analyze hydrological behavior and perform model assessments.
Vazken Andréassian, Guilherme Mendoza Guimarães, Alban de Lavenne, and Julien Lerat
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-414, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-414, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Using 4122 catchments from four continents, we investigate how annual streamflow depends on climate variables (rainfall and potential evaporation) and on the season when precipitation occurs, using and index representing the synchronicity between precipitation and potential evaporation. In all countries and under the main climates represented, synchronicity is, after precipitation, the second most important factor to explain annual streamflow variations.
Léonard Santos, Vazken Andréassian, Torben O. Sonnenborg, Göran Lindström, Alban de Lavenne, Charles Perrin, Lila Collet, and Guillaume Thirel
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 29, 683–700, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-683-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-683-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This work investigates how hydrological models are transferred to a period in which climate conditions are different to the ones of the period in which they were set up. The robustness assessment test built to detect dependencies between model error and climatic drivers was applied to three hydrological models in 352 catchments in Denmark, France and Sweden. Potential issues are seen in a significant number of catchments for the models, even though the catchments differ for each model.
Guillaume Thirel, Léonard Santos, Olivier Delaigue, and Charles Perrin
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 4837–4860, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-4837-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-4837-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We discuss how mathematical transformations impact calibrated hydrological model simulations. We assess how 11 transformations behave over the complete range of streamflows. Extreme transformations lead to models that are specialized for extreme streamflows but show poor performance outside the range of targeted streamflows and are less robust. We show that no a priori assumption about transformations can be taken as warranted.
Thibault Hallouin, François Bourgin, Charles Perrin, Maria-Helena Ramos, and Vazken Andréassian
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 4561–4578, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4561-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4561-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The evaluation of the quality of hydrological model outputs against streamflow observations is widespread in the hydrological literature. In order to improve on the reproducibility of published studies, a new evaluation tool dedicated to hydrological applications is presented. It is open source and usable in a variety of programming languages to make it as accessible as possible to the community. Thus, authors and readers alike can use the same tool to produce and reproduce the results.
Ralph Bathelemy, Pierre Brigode, Vazken Andréassian, Charles Perrin, Vincent Moron, Cédric Gaucherel, Emmanuel Tric, and Dominique Boisson
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 16, 2073–2098, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-2073-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-2073-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The aim of this work is to provide the first hydroclimatic database for Haiti, a Caribbean country particularly vulnerable to meteorological and hydrological hazards. The resulting database, named Simbi, provides hydroclimatic time series for around 150 stations and 24 catchment areas.
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
Short summary
Streamflow forecasting is useful for many applications, ranging from population safety (e.g. floods) to water resource management (e.g. agriculture or hydropower). To this end, hydrological models must be optimized. However, a model is inherently wrong. This study aims to analyse the contribution of a multi-model approach within a variable spatial framework to improve streamflow simulations. The underlying idea is to take advantage of the strength of each modelling framework tested.
Nils Poncet, Philippe Lucas-Picher, Yves Tramblay, Guillaume Thirel, Humberto Vergara, Jonathan Gourley, and Antoinette Alias
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 1163–1183, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-1163-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-1163-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
High-resolution convection-permitting climate models (CPMs) are now available to better simulate rainstorm events leading to flash floods. In this study, two hydrological models are compared to simulate floods in a Mediterranean basin, showing a better ability of the CPM to reproduce flood peaks compared to coarser-resolution climate models. Future projections are also different, with a projected increase for the most severe floods and a potential decrease for the most frequent events.
Laurent Strohmenger, Eric Sauquet, Claire Bernard, Jérémie Bonneau, Flora Branger, Amélie Bresson, Pierre Brigode, Rémy Buzier, Olivier Delaigue, Alexandre Devers, Guillaume Evin, Maïté Fournier, Shu-Chen Hsu, Sandra Lanini, Alban de Lavenne, Thibault Lemaitre-Basset, Claire Magand, Guilherme Mendoza Guimarães, Max Mentha, Simon Munier, Charles Perrin, Tristan Podechard, Léo Rouchy, Malak Sadki, Myriam Soutif-Bellenger, François Tilmant, Yves Tramblay, Anne-Lise Véron, Jean-Philippe Vidal, and Guillaume Thirel
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 27, 3375–3391, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-3375-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-3375-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We present the results of a large visual inspection campaign of 674 streamflow time series in France. The objective was to detect non-natural records resulting from instrument failure or anthropogenic influences, such as hydroelectric power generation or reservoir management. We conclude that the identification of flaws in flow time series is highly dependent on the objectives and skills of individual evaluators, and we raise the need for better practices for data cleaning.
Olivier Delaigue, Pierre Brigode, Guillaume Thirel, and Laurent Coron
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 27, 3293–3327, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-3293-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-3293-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Teaching hydrological modeling is an important, but difficult, matter. It requires appropriate tools and teaching material. In this article, we present the airGRteaching package, which is an open-source software tool relying on widely used hydrological models. This tool proposes an interface and numerous hydrological modeling exercises representing a wide range of hydrological applications. We show how this tool can be applied to simple but real-life cases.
Eva Sebok, Hans Jørgen Henriksen, Ernesto Pastén-Zapata, Peter Berg, Guillaume Thirel, Anthony Lemoine, Andrea Lira-Loarca, Christiana Photiadou, Rafael Pimentel, Paul Royer-Gaspard, Erik Kjellström, Jens Hesselbjerg Christensen, Jean Philippe Vidal, Philippe Lucas-Picher, Markus G. Donat, Giovanni Besio, María José Polo, Simon Stisen, Yvan Caballero, Ilias G. Pechlivanidis, Lars Troldborg, and Jens Christian Refsgaard
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 5605–5625, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-5605-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-5605-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Hydrological models projecting the impact of changing climate carry a lot of uncertainty. Thus, these models usually have a multitude of simulations using different future climate data. This study used the subjective opinion of experts to assess which climate and hydrological models are the most likely to correctly predict climate impacts, thereby easing the computational burden. The experts could select more likely hydrological models, while the climate models were deemed equally probable.
Alban de Lavenne, Vazken Andréassian, Louise Crochemore, Göran Lindström, and Berit Arheimer
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 2715–2732, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-2715-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-2715-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
A watershed remembers the past to some extent, and this memory influences its behavior. This memory is defined by the ability to store past rainfall for several years. By releasing this water into the river or the atmosphere, it tends to forget. We describe how this memory fades over time in France and Sweden. A few watersheds show a multi-year memory. It increases with the influence of groundwater or dry conditions. After 3 or 4 years, they behave independently of the past.
Antoine Pelletier and Vazken Andréassian
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 2733–2758, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-2733-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-2733-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
A large part of the water cycle takes place underground. In many places, the soil stores water during the wet periods and can release it all year long, which is particularly visible when the river level is low. Modelling tools that are used to simulate and forecast the behaviour of the river struggle to represent this. We improved an existing model to take underground water into account using measurements of the soil water content. Results allow us make recommendations for model users.
Thibault Lemaitre-Basset, Ludovic Oudin, Guillaume Thirel, and Lila Collet
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 2147–2159, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-2147-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-2147-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Increasing temperature will impact evaporation and water resource management. Hydrological models are fed with an estimation of the evaporative demand of the atmosphere, called potential evapotranspiration (PE). The objectives of this study were (1) to compute the future PE anomaly over France and (2) to determine the impact of the choice of the method to estimate PE. Our results show that all methods present similar future trends. No method really stands out from the others.
Alexis Jeantet, Hocine Henine, Cédric Chaumont, Lila Collet, Guillaume Thirel, and Julien Tournebize
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 5447–5471, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-5447-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-5447-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The hydrological subsurface drainage model SIDRA-RU is assessed at the French national scale, using a unique database representing the large majority of the French drained areas. The model is evaluated following its capacity to simulate the drainage discharge variability and the annual drained water balance. Eventually, the temporal robustness of SIDRA-RU is assessed to demonstrate the utility of this model as a long-term management tool.
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
Short summary
In this note, a new method (RAT) is proposed to assess the robustness of hydrological models. The RAT method is particularly interesting because it does not require multiple calibrations (it is therefore applicable to uncalibrated models), and it can be used to determine whether a hydrological model may be safely used for climate change impact studies. Success at the robustness assessment test is a necessary (but not sufficient) condition of model robustness.
Paul C. Astagneau, Guillaume Thirel, Olivier Delaigue, Joseph H. A. Guillaume, Juraj Parajka, Claudia C. Brauer, Alberto Viglione, Wouter Buytaert, and Keith J. Beven
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 3937–3973, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-3937-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-3937-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The R programming language has become an important tool for many applications in hydrology. In this study, we provide an analysis of some of the R tools providing hydrological models. In total, two aspects are uniformly investigated, namely the conceptualisation of the models and the practicality of their implementation for end-users. These comparisons aim at easing the choice of R tools for users and at improving their usability for hydrology modelling to support more transferable research.
Laurène J. E. Bouaziz, Fabrizio Fenicia, Guillaume Thirel, Tanja de Boer-Euser, Joost Buitink, Claudia C. Brauer, Jan De Niel, Benjamin J. Dewals, Gilles Drogue, Benjamin Grelier, Lieke A. Melsen, Sotirios Moustakas, Jiri Nossent, Fernando Pereira, Eric Sprokkereef, Jasper Stam, Albrecht H. Weerts, Patrick Willems, Hubert H. G. Savenije, and Markus Hrachowitz
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 1069–1095, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-1069-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-1069-2021, 2021
Short summary
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.
Manon Cassagnole, Maria-Helena Ramos, Ioanna Zalachori, Guillaume Thirel, Rémy Garçon, Joël Gailhard, and Thomas Ouillon
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 1033–1052, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-1033-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-1033-2021, 2021
Cited articles
Blöschl, G., Bierkens, M. F. P., Chambel, A., et al.:
Twenty-three unsolved problems in hydrology (UPH) – a community perspective,
Hydrolog. Sci. J., 64, 1141–1158, https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2019.1620507, 2019. a
Broderick, C., Matthews, T., Wilby, R. L., Bastola, S., and Murphy, C.:
Transferability of hydrological models and ensemble averaging methods between contrasting climatic periods,
Water Resour. Res., 52, 8343–8373, https://doi.org/10.1002/2016wr018850, 2016. a, b, c
Clark, M. P., Wilby, R. L., Gutmann, E. D., Vano, J. A., Gangopadhyay, S., Wood, A. W., Fowler, H. J., Prudhomme, C., Arnold, J. R., and Brekke, L. D.:
Characterizing uncertainty of the hydrologic impacts of climate change,
Curr. Clim. Change Rep., 2, 55–64, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40641-016-0034-x, 2016. a
Coron, L., Andréassian, V., Perrin, C., Lerat, J., Vaze, J., Bourqui, M., and Hendrickx, F.:
Crash testing hydrological models in contrasted climate conditions: An experiment on 216 Australian catchments,
Water Resour. Res., 48, W05552, https://doi.org/10.1029/2011wr011721, 2012. a, b
Coron, L., Andréassian, V., Perrin, C., Bourqui, M., and Hendrickx, F.: On the lack of robustness of hydrologic models regarding water balance simulation: a diagnostic approach applied to three models of increasing complexity on 20 mountainous catchments, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 727–746, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-18-727-2014, 2014. a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h
Coron, L., Thirel, G., Delaigue, O., Perrin, C., and Andréassian, V.:
The suite of lumped GR hydrological models in an R package,
Environ. Model. Softw., 94, 166–171, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2017.05.002, 2017. a
Coron, L., Perrin, C., Delaigue, O., Thirel, G., and Michel, C.:
airGR: Suite of GR Hydrological Models for Precipitation-Runoff Modelling,
R package version 1.0.12.3.2, available at: https://webgr.inrae.fr/en/airGR/, last access: 28 August 2018. a
Dakhlaoui, H., Ruelland, D., Tramblay, Y., and Bargaoui, Z.:
Evaluating the robustness of conceptual rainfall-runoff models under climate variability in northern Tunisia,
J. Hydrol., 550, 201–217, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.04.032, 2017. a, b
Dakhlaoui, H., Ruelland, D., and Tramblay, Y.:
A bootstrap-based differential split-sample test to assess the transferability of conceptual rainfall-runoff models under past and future climate variability,
J. Hydrol., 575, 470–486, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2019.05.056, 2019. a
Delaigue, O., Génot, B., Lebecherel, L., Brigode, P., and Bourgin, P. Y.:
Database of watershed-scale hydroclimatic observations in France,
Université Paris-Saclay, INRAE, HYCAR Research Unit, Hydrology group, Antony, [data set], available at: https://webgr.inrae.fr/base-de-donnees/, last access: 31 July 2020. a
Fowler, K. J. A., Peel, M. C., Western, A. W., Zhang, L., and Peterson, T. J.: Simulating runoff under changing climatic conditions: Revisiting an apparent deficiency of conceptual rainfall–runoff models,
Water Resour. Res., 52, 1820–1846, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015wr018068, 2016. a
Gupta, H. V., Kling, H., Yilmaz, K. K., and Martinez, G. F.:
Decomposition of the mean squared error and NSE performance criteria: Implications for improving hydrological modelling,
J. Hydrol., 377, 80–91, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.08.003, 2009. a
Hagemann, S., Chen, C., Clark, D. B., Folwell, S., Gosling, S. N., Haddeland, I., Hanasaki, N., Heinke, J., Ludwig, F., Voss, F., and Wiltshire, A. J.: Climate change impact on available water resources obtained using multiple global climate and hydrology models, Earth Syst. Dynam., 4, 129–144, https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-4-129-2013, 2013. a
Klemeš, V.:
Operational testing of hydrological simulation models,
Hydrolog. Sci. J., 31, 13–24, https://doi.org/10.1080/02626668609491024, 1986. a
Leleu, I., Tonnelier, I., Puechberty, R., Gouin, P., Viquendi, I., Cobos, L., Foray, A., Baillon, M., and Ndima, P.-O.:
La refonte du système d'information national pour la gestion et la mise à disposition des données hydrométriques,
Houille Blanche, 1, 25–32, https://doi.org/10.1051/lhb/2014004, 2014. a
Mathevet, T.:
Quels modèles pluie-débit globaux au pas de temps horaire? Développements empiriques et comparaison de modèles sur un large échantillon de bassins versants,
PhD, ENGREF Paris, available at: https://hal.inrae.fr/tel-02587642 (last access: 27 April 2020), 2005. a
Mathevet, T., Gupta, H., Perrin, C., Andréassian, V., and Le Moine, N.:
Assessing the performance and robustness of two conceptual rainfall-runoff models on a worldwide sample of watersheds,
J. Hydrol., 124698, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2020.124698, 2020. a
Melsen, L. A., Addor, N., Mizukami, N., Newman, A. J., Torfs, P. J. J. F., Clark, M. P., Uijlenhoet, R., and Teuling, A. J.: Mapping (dis)agreement in hydrologic projections, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 1775–1791, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-1775-2018, 2018. a
Merz, R., Parajka, J., and Blöschl, G.:
Time stability of catchment model parameters: Implications for climate impact analyses,
Water Resour. Res., 47, W02531, https://doi.org/10.1029/2010wr009505, 2011. a
Nash, J. E. and Sutcliffe, J. V.:
River flow forecasting through conceptual models part I – A discussion of principles,
J. Hydrol., 10, 282–290, https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1694(70)90255-6, 1970. a
Oudin, L., Hervieu, F., Michel, C., Perrin, C., Andréassian, V., Anctil, F., and Loumagne, C.:
Which potential evapotranspiration input for a lumped rainfall–runoff model?: Part 2 – Towards a simple and efficient potential evapotranspiration model for rainfall–runoff modelling,
J. Hydrol., 303, 290–306, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2004.08.026, 2005. a
Perrin, C., Michel, C., and Andréassian, V.:
Improvement of a parsimonious model for streamflow simulation,
J. Hydrol., 279, 275–289, https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-1694(03)00225-7, 2003. a
Refsgaard, J. C., Madsen, H., Andréassian, V., Arnbjerg-Nielsen, K., Davidson, T. A., Drews, M., Hamilton, D. P., Jeppesen, E., Kjellström, E., Olesen, J. E., Sonnenborg, T. O., Trolle, D., Willems, P., and Christensen, J. H.:
A framework for testing the ability of models to project climate change and its impacts,
Climatic Change, 122, 271–282, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-013-0990-2, 2014. a
Royer-Gaspard, P.:
De la robustesse des modèles hydrologiques face à des conditions climatiques variables,
PhD, Sorbonne Université, Paris, available at: https://webgr.inrae.fr/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/thesis_Royer-GaspardPaul_FR.pdf, last access: 1 October 2021. a
Saft, M., Peel, M. C., Western, A. W., Perraud, J.-M., and Zhang, L.:
Bias in streamflow projections due to climate-induced shifts in catchment response,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 43, 1574–1581, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015gl067326, 2016. a
Samuel, J., Coulibaly, P., and Metcalfe, R. A.:
Identification of rainfall–runoff model for improved baseflow estimation in ungauged basins,
Hydrol. Process., 26, 356–366, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.8133, 2012. a
SCHAPI: Banque HYDRO, available at:
http://www.data.eaufrance.fr/ (last access: 21 January 2019),
2021. a
Schewe, J., Heinke, J., Gerten, D., Haddeland, I., Arnell, N. W., Clark, D. B., Dankers, R., Eisner, S., Fekete, B. M., Colón-González, F. J., Gosling, S. N., Kim, H., Liu, X., Masaki, Y., Portmann, F. T., Satoh, Y., Stacke, T., Tang, Q., Wada, Y., Wisser, D., Albrecht, T., Frieler, K., Piontek, F., Warszawski, L., and Kabat, P.:
Multimodel assessment of water scarcity under climate change,
P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 11, 3245–3250, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1222460110, 2014. a
Thirel, G., Andréassian, V., Perrin, C., Audouy, J.-N., Berthet, L., Edwards, P., Folton, N. Furusho, C., Kuentz, A., Lerat, J., Lindström, G., Martin, E., Mathevet, T., Merz, R., Parajka, J., Ruelland, D., and Vaze, J.:
Hydrology under change: an evaluation protocol to investigate how hydrological models deal with changing catchments,
Hydrolog. Sci. J., 60, 1184–1199, https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2014.967248, 2015. a
Valéry, A., Andréassian, V., and Perrin, C.:
“As simple as possible but not simpler”: What is useful in a temperature-based snow-accounting routine? Part 2 – Sensitivity analysis of the Cemaneige snow accounting routine on 380 catchments,
J. Hydrol., 517, 1176–1187, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.04.058, 2014. a, b
Vaze, J., Post, D. A., Chiew, F. H. S., Perraud, J.-M., Viney, N. R., and Teng, J.:
Climate non-stationarity–validity of calibrated rainfall–runoff models for use in climate change studies,
J. Hydrol., 394, 447–457, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2010.09.018, 2010.
a, b
Vidal, J.-P., Martin, E., Franchistéguy, L., Baillon, M., and Soubeyroux, J.-M.:
A 50-year high-resolution atmospheric reanalysis over France with the Safran system,
Int. J. Climatol., 30, 1627–1644, https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.2003, 2010. a
Vidal, J.-P., Hingray, B., Magand, C., Sauquet, E., and Ducharne, A.: Hierarchy of climate and hydrological uncertainties in transient low-flow projections, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 20, 3651–3672, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-20-3651-2016, 2016. a
Short summary
Most evaluation studies based on the differential split-sample test (DSST) endorse the consensus that rainfall–runoff models lack climatic robustness. In this technical note, we propose a new performance metric to evaluate model robustness without applying the DSST and which can be used with a single hydrological model calibration. Our work makes it possible to evaluate the temporal transferability of any hydrological model, including uncalibrated models, at a very low computational cost.
Most evaluation studies based on the differential split-sample test (DSST) endorse the consensus...
