Archfield, S. A., Clark, M., Arheimer, B., Hay, L. E., McMillan, H., Kiang, J. E., Seibert, J., Hakala, K., Bock, A., Wagener, T., Farmer, W. H.,
Andréassian, V., Attinger, S., Viglione, A., Knight, R., Markstrom, S.,
and Over, T.: Accelerating advances in continental domain hydrologic modeling, Water Resour. Res., 51, 10078–10091,
https://doi.org/10.1002/2015WR017498, 2015.
a
Atkinson, S. E., Woods, R. A., and Sivapalan, M.: Climate and landscape
controls on water balance model complexity over changing timescales, Water
Resour. Res., 38, 50-1–50-17,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2002WR001487, 2002.
a
Beven, K., Smith, P. J., and Wood, A.: On the colour and spin of epistemic
error (and what we might do about it), Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 15, 3123–3133,
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-15-3123-2011, 2011.
a
Butts, M. B., Payne, J. T., Kristensen, M., and Madsen, H.: An evaluation of
the impact of model structure on hydrological modelling uncertainty for
streamflow simulation, J. Hydrol., 298, 242–266,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2004.03.042, 2004.
a
Chagas, V. B. P., Chaffe, P. L. B., Addor, N., Fan, F. M., Fleischmann, A. S., Paiva, R. C. D., and Siqueira, V. A.: CAMELS-BR: hydrometeorological time
series and landscape attributes for 897 catchments in Brazil, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 12, 2075–2096,
https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-2075-2020, 2020.
a
Clark, M. P., Kavetski, D., and Fenicia, F.: Pursuing the method of multiple
working hypotheses for hydrological modeling, Water Resour. Res., 47, W09301,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2010WR009827, 2011a.
a
Clark, M. P., McMillan, H. K., Collins, D. B. G., Kavetski, D., and Woods, R. A.: Hydrological field data from a modeller's perspective: Part 2:
process-based evaluation of model hypotheses, Hydrol. Process., 25, 523–543,
https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.7902, 2011b.
a,
b
Clark, M. P., Vogel, R. M., Lamontagne, J. R., Mizukami, N., Knoben, W. J. M., Tang, G., Gharari, S., Freer, J. E., Whitfield, P. H., Shook, K. R., and
Papalexiou, S. M.: The Abuse of Popular Performance Metrics in Hydrologic
Modeling, Water Resour. Res., 57, e2020WR029001,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2020WR029001, 2021.
a,
b
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
Coxon, G., Addor, N., Bloomfield, J. P., Freer, J., Fry, M., Hannaford, J.,
Howden, N. J. K., Lane, R., Lewis, M., Robinson, E. L., Wagener, T., and Woods, R.: CAMELS-GB: hydrometeorological time series and landscape
attributes for 671 catchments in Great Britain, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 12, 2459–2483,
https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-2459-2020, 2020.
a
Duan, Q., Sorooshian, S., and Gupta, V.: Effective and efficient global
optimization for conceptual rainfall-runoff models, Water Resour. Res., 28, 1015–1031,
https://doi.org/10.1029/91WR02985, 1992.
a
Duan, Q., Schaake, J., Andréassian, V., Franks, S., Goteti, G., Gupta, H.,
Gusev, Y., Habets, F., Hall, A., Hay, L., Hogue, T., Huang, M., Leavesley,
G., Liang, X., Nasonova, O., Noilhan, J., Oudin, L., Sorooshian, S., Wagener,
T., and Wood, E.: Model Parameter Estimation Experiment (MOPEX): An overview
of science strategy and major results from the second and third workshops, J. Hydrol., 320, 3–17,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2005.07.031, 2006.
a
Farmer, D., Sivapalan, M., and Jothityangkoon, C.: Climate, soil, and
vegetation controls upon the variability of water balance in temperate and
semiarid landscapes: Downward approach to water balance analysis, Water Resour. Res., 39, 1035,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2001WR000328, 2003.
a
Fenicia, F., Kavetski, D., Savenije, H. H. G., and Pfister, L.: From spatially variable streamflow to distributed hydrological models: Analysis of key modeling decisions, Water Resour. Res., 52, 954–989,
https://doi.org/10.1002/2015WR017398, 2016.
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
Fowler, K. J. A., Acharya, S. C., Addor, N., Chou, C., and Peel, M. C.:
CAMELS-AUS: hydrometeorological time series and landscape attributes for 222 catchments in Australia, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 13, 3847–3867,
https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-3847-2021, 2021.
a
Garrick, M., Cunnane, C., and Nash, J. E.: A criterion of efficiency for
rainfall-runoff models, J. Hydrol., 36, 375–381,
https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1694(78)90155-5, 1978.
a
Gupta, H. V., Wagener, T., and Liu, Y.: Reconciling theory with observations: elements of a diagnostic approach to model evaluation, Hydrol. Process., 3813, 3802–3813,
https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.6989, 2008.
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,
b
Gupta, H. V., Clark, M. P., Vrugt, J. A., Abramowitz, G., and Ye, M.: Towards a comprehensive assessment of model structural adequacy, Water Resour. Res., 48, W08301,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2011WR011044, 2012.
a
Höge, M., Guthke, A., and Nowak, W.: The hydrologist's guide to Bayesian
model selection, averaging and combination, J. Hydrol., 572, 96–107,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2019.01.072, 2019.
a
Jothityangkoon, C., Sivapalan, M., and Farmer, D.: Process controls of water
balance variability in a large semi-arid catchment: downward approach to
hydrological model development, J. Hydrol., 254, 174–198,
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(01)00496-6, 2001.
a
Kavetski, D. and Kuczera, G.: Model smoothing strategies to remove microscale
discontinuities and spurious secondary optima in objective functions in
hydrological calibration, Water Resour. Res., 43, W03411,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2006WR005195, 2007.
a
Kirchner, J. W.: Getting the right answers for the right reasons: Linking measurements, analyses, and models to advance the science of hydrology,
Water Resour. Res., 42, W03S04,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2005WR004362, 2006.
a,
b,
c,
d
Knoben, W. J., Freer, J. E., Fowler, K. J., Peel, M. C., and Woods, R. A.:
Modular Assessment of Rainfall-Runoff Models Toolbox (MARRMoT) v1.2: An
open-source, extendable framework providing implementations of 46 conceptual
hydrologic models as continuous state-space formulations, Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 2463–2480,
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-2463-2019, 2019a.
a,
b,
c,
d,
e
Knoben, W. J. M., Freer, J. E., and Woods, R. A.: Technical note: Inherent
benchmark or not? Comparing Nash–Sutcliffe and Kling–Gupta efficiency
scores, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 4323–4331,
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-4323-2019, 2019b.
a
Knoben, W. J., Freer, J. E., Peel, M. C., Fowler, K. J., and Woods, R. A.: A
Brief Analysis of Conceptual Model Structure Uncertainty Using 36 Models and
559 Catchments, Water Resour. Res., 56, 1–23,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2019WR025975, 2020.
a,
b,
c,
d,
e,
f
Lamontagne, J. R., Barber, C. A., and Vogel, R. M.: Improved Estimators of
Model Performance Efficiency for Skewed Hydrologic Data, Water Resour. Res., 56, e2020WR027101,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2020WR027101, 2020.
a
Mendoza, P. A., Clark, M. P., Mizukami, N., Gutmann, E. D., Arnold, J. R.,
Brekke, L. D., and Rajagopalan, B.: How do hydrologic modeling decisions
affect the portrayal of climate change impacts?, Hydrol. Process., 1095, 1071–1095,
https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.10684, 2015.
a
Mizukami, N., Rakovec, O., Newman, A. J., Clark, M. P., Wood, A. W., Gupta,
H. V., and Kumar, R.: On the choice of calibration metrics for “high-flow”
estimation using hydrologic models, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 23,
2601–2614,
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-2601-2019, 2019.
a
Newman, A., Sampson, K., Clark, M. P., Bock, A., Viger, R. J., and Blodgett, D.: A large-sample watershed-scale hydrometeorological dataset for the contiguous USA, UCAR/NCAR, Boulder, CO [data set],
https://doi.org/10.5065/D6MW2F4D, 2014.
a
Newman, A. J., Clark, M. P., Sampson, K., Wood, A., Hay, L. E., Bock, A.,
Viger, R. J., Blodgett, D., Brekke, L., Arnold, J. R., Hopson, T., and Duan,
Q.: Development of a large-sample watershed-scale hydrometeorological data
set for the contiguous USA: Data set characteristics and assessment of regional variability in hydrologic model performance, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 19, 209–223,
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-19-209-2015, 2015.
a,
b,
c
Pechlivanidis, I., Jackson, B., McIntyre, N., and Wheater, H.: Catchment scale hydrological modelling: a review of model types, calibration approaches and uncertainty analysis methods in the context of recent developments in
technology and applications, Global NEST, 13, 193–214, 2011.
a,
b
Perrin, C., Michel, C., and Andréassian, V.: Does a large number of
parameters enhance model performance? Comparative assessment of common
catchment model structures on 429 catchments, J. Hydrol., 242, 275–301,
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(00)00393-0, 2001.
a,
b,
c,
d
Pianosi, F., Sarrazin, F., and Wagener, T.: A Matlab toolbox for Global
Sensitivity Analysis, Environ. Model. Softw., 70, 80–85,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2015.04.009, 2015.
a
Rojas, R., Kahunde, S., Peeters, L., Batelaan, O., Feyen, L., and Dassargues,
A.: Application of a multimodel approach to account for conceptual model and
scenario uncertainties in groundwater modelling, J. Hydrol., 394, 416–435,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2010.09.016, 2010.
a
Schöniger, A., Wöhling, T., Samaniego, L., and Nowak, W.: Model
selection on solid ground: Rigorous comparison of nine ways to evaluate
Bayesian model evidence, Water Resour. Res., 50, 9484–9513,
https://doi.org/10.1002/2014WR016062, 2014.
a
Seibert, J. and Vis, M. J.: Teaching hydrological modeling with a
user-friendly catchment-runoff-model software package, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 16, 3315–3325,
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-16-3315-2012, 2012.
a,
b
Seibert, J., Uhlenbrook, S., and Wagener, T.: Preface Hydrology education in a changing world, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 1393–1399,
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-17-1393-2013, 2013.
a,
b,
c
Seibert, J., Vis, M. J. P., Lewis, E., and van Meerveld, H.: Upper and lower
benchmarks in hydrological modelling, Hydrol. Process., 32, 1120–1125,
https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.11476, 2018.
a,
b
Spieler, D., Mai, J., Craig, J. R., Tolson, B. A., and Schütze, N.: Automatic Model Structure Identification for Conceptual Hydrologic Models, Water Resour. Res., 56, e2019WR027009,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2019WR027009, 2020.
a,
b
Thompson, S. E., Ngambeki, I., Troch, P. A., Sivapalan, M., and Evangelou, D.: Incorporating student-centered approaches into catchment hydrology teaching: A review and synthesis, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 16, 3263–3278,
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-16-3263-2012, 2012.
a,
b,
c
van Esse, W. R., Perrin, C., Booij, M. J., Augustijn, D. C. M., Fenicia, F.,
Kavetski, D., and Lobligeois, F.: The influence of conceptual model structure
on model performance: a comparative study for 237 French catchments, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 4227–4239,
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-17-4227-2013, 2013.
a,
b
Wagener, T., Gupta, H. V., Carpenter, K., James, B., Vazquez, R., Sorooshian, S., and Shuttleworth, J.: A hydroarchive for the free exchange of hydrological software, Hydrol. Process., 18, 389–391,
https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.5216, 2004.
a
Wagener, T., Kelleher, C., Weiler, M., McGlynn, B., Gooseff, M., Marshall, L., Meixner, T., McGuire, K., Gregg, S., Sharma, P., and Zappe, S.: It takes a community to raise a hydrologist: The Modular Curriculum for Hydrologic
Advancement (MOCHA), Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 16, 3405–3418,
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-16-3405-2012, 2012.
a,
b,
c,
d,
e
