Articles | Volume 26, issue 13
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-3537-2022
© Author(s) 2022. 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-26-3537-2022
© Author(s) 2022. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Research article
| Highlight paper
| 
08 Jul 2022
Research article | Highlight paper |
| 08 Jul 2022
| 08 Jul 2022
The Great Lakes Runoff Intercomparison Project Phase 4: the Great Lakes (GRIP-GL)
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada
Hongren Shen
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada
Bryan A. Tolson
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada
Étienne Gaborit
Meteorological Research Division, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Dorval, QC, Canada
Richard Arsenault
Department of Construction Engineering, École de technologie supérieure, Montreal, QC, Canada
James R. Craig
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada
Vincent Fortin
Meteorological Research Division, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Dorval, QC, Canada
Lauren M. Fry
Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Martin Gauch
Institute for Machine Learning, Johannes Kepler University, Linz, Austria
Daniel Klotz
Institute for Machine Learning, Johannes Kepler University, Linz, Austria
Frederik Kratzert
Institute for Machine Learning, Johannes Kepler University, Linz, Austria
Google Research, Vienna, Austria
Nicole O'Brien
National Hydrological Service, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Burlington, ON, Canada
Daniel G. Princz
National Hydrological Service, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Saskatoon, SK, Canada
Sinan Rasiya Koya
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Nebraska–Lincoln, Lincoln, NE, USA
Tirthankar Roy
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Nebraska–Lincoln, Lincoln, NE, USA
Frank Seglenieks
National Hydrological Service, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Burlington, ON, Canada
Narayan K. Shrestha
National Hydrological Service, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Burlington, ON, Canada
André G. T. Temgoua
National Hydrological Service, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Burlington, ON, Canada
Vincent Vionnet
Meteorological Research Division, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Dorval, QC, Canada
Jonathan W. Waddell
Great Lakes Hydraulics and Hydrology Office, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Detroit, MI, USA
Related authors
Maria Staudinger, Anna Herzog, Ralf Loritz, Tobias Houska, Sandra Pool, Diana Spieler, Paul D. Wagner, Juliane Mai, Jens Kiesel, Stephan Thober, Björn Guse, and Uwe Ehret
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1076, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1076, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Four process-based and four data-driven hydrological models are compared using different training data. We found process-based models to perform better with small data sets but stop learning soon, while data-driven models learn longer. The study highlights the importance of memory in data and the impact of different data sampling methods on model performance. The direct comparison of these models is novel and provides a clear understanding of their performance under various data conditions.
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
Short summary
It is challenging to incorporate input variables' spatial distribution information when implementing long short-term memory (LSTM) models for streamflow prediction. This work presents a novel hybrid modelling approach to predict streamflow while accounting for spatial variability. We evaluated the performance against lumped LSTM predictions in 224 basins across the Great Lakes region in North America. This approach shows promise for predicting streamflow in large, ungauged basin.
Samah Larabi, Juliane Mai, Markus Schnorbus, Bryan A. Tolson, and Francis Zwiers
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 27, 3241–3263, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-3241-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-3241-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The computational cost of sensitivity analysis (SA) becomes prohibitive for large hydrologic modeling domains. Here, using a large-scale Variable Infiltration Capacity (VIC) deployment, we show that watershed classification helps identify the spatial pattern of parameter sensitivity within the domain at a reduced cost. Findings reveal the opportunity to leverage climate and land cover attributes to reduce the cost of SA and facilitate more rapid deployment of large-scale land surface models.
Robert Chlumsky, Juliane Mai, James R. Craig, and Bryan A. Tolson
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2023-69, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2023-69, 2023
Revised manuscript not accepted
Short summary
Short summary
A blended model allows multiple hydrologic processes to be represented in a single model, which allows for a model to achieve high performance without the need to modify its structure for different catchments. Here, we improve upon the initial blended version by testing more than 30 blended models in twelve catchments to improve the overall model performance. We validate our proposed, updated blended model version with independent catchments, and make this version available for open use.
Richard Arsenault, Jean-Luc Martel, Frédéric Brunet, François Brissette, and Juliane Mai
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 27, 139–157, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-139-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-139-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Predicting flow in rivers where no observation records are available is a daunting task. For decades, hydrological models were set up on these gauges, and their parameters were estimated based on the hydrological response of similar or nearby catchments where records exist. New developments in machine learning have now made it possible to estimate flows at ungauged locations more precisely than with hydrological models. This study confirms the performance superiority of machine learning models.
Michelle Viswanathan, Tobias K. D. Weber, Sebastian Gayler, Juliane Mai, and Thilo Streck
Biogeosciences, 19, 2187–2209, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-19-2187-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-19-2187-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We analysed the evolution of model parameter uncertainty and prediction error as we updated parameters of a maize phenology model based on yearly observations, by sequentially applying Bayesian calibration. Although parameter uncertainty was reduced, prediction quality deteriorated when calibration and prediction data were from different maize ripening groups or temperature conditions. The study highlights that Bayesian methods should account for model limitations and inherent data structures.
Nicolas Gasset, Vincent Fortin, Milena Dimitrijevic, Marco Carrera, Bernard Bilodeau, Ryan Muncaster, Étienne Gaborit, Guy Roy, Nedka Pentcheva, Maxim Bulat, Xihong Wang, Radenko Pavlovic, Franck Lespinas, Dikra Khedhaouiria, and Juliane Mai
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 4917–4945, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-4917-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-4917-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
In this paper, we highlight the importance of including land-data assimilation as well as offline precipitation analysis components in a regional reanalysis system. We also document the performance of the first multidecadal 10 km reanalysis performed with the GEM atmospheric model that can be used for seamless land-surface and hydrological modelling in North America. It is of particular interest for transboundary basins, as existing datasets often show discontinuities at the border.
Juliane Mai, James R. Craig, and Bryan A. Tolson
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 5835–5858, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-5835-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-5835-2020, 2020
Julien Meloche, Nicolas R. Leroux, Benoit Montpetit, Vincent Vionnet, and Chris Derksen
The Cryosphere, 19, 2949–2962, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-19-2949-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-19-2949-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Measuring snow mass from radar measurements is possible with information on snow and a radar model to link the measurements to snow. A key variable in a retrieval is the number of snow layers, with more layers yielding richer information but at increased computational cost. Here, we show the capabilities of a new method for simplifying a complex snowpack while preserving the scattering behavior of the snowpack and conserving its mass.
Colleen Mortimer and Vincent Vionnet
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 17, 3619–3640, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-17-3619-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-17-3619-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
In situ observations of snow water equivalent (SWE) are critical for climate applications and resource management. NorSWE is a dataset of in situ SWE observations covering North America, Norway, Finland, Switzerland, Russia, and Nepal over the period 1979–2021. It includes more than 11.5 million observations from more than 10 000 different locations compiled from nine different sources. Snow depth and derived bulk snow density are included when available.
Vincent Vionnet, Nicolas Romain Leroux, Vincent Fortin, Maria Abrahamowicz, Georgina Woolley, Giulia Mazzotti, Manon Gaillard, Matthieu Lafaysse, Alain Royer, Florent Domine, Nathalie Gauthier, Nick Rutter, Chris Derksen, and Stéphane Bélair
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3396, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3396, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Geoscientific Model Development (GMD).
Short summary
Short summary
Snow microstructure controls snowpack properties, but most land surface models overlook this factor. To support future satellite missions, we created a new land surface model based on the Crocus scheme that simulates snow microstructure. Key improvements include better snow albedo representation, enhanced Arctic snow modeling, and improved forest module to capture Canada's diverse snow conditions. Results demonstrate improved simulations of snow density and melt across large regions of Canada.
Jean-Luc Martel, François Brissette, Richard Arsenault, Richard Turcotte, Mariana Castañeda-Gonzalez, William Armstrong, Edouard Mailhot, Jasmine Pelletier-Dumont, Gabriel Rondeau-Genesse, and Louis-Philippe Caron
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 29, 2811–2836, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-2811-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-2811-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study compares long short-term memory (LSTM) neural networks with traditional hydrological models to predict future streamflow under climate change. Using data from 148 catchments, it finds that LSTM models, which learn from extensive data sequences, perform differently and often better than traditional hydrological models. The continental LSTM model, which includes data from diverse climate zones, is particularly effective for understanding climate impacts on water resources.
Robert Chlumsky, James R. Craig, and Bryan A. Tolson
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 3387–3403, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3387-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-3387-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We aim to improve mapping of floods and present a new method for hydraulic modelling that uses a combination of novel geospatial analysis and existing hydraulic modelling approaches. This method is wrapped into a modelling software called Blackbird. We compared Blackbird with two other existing options for flood mapping and found that the Blackbird model outperformed both. The Blackbird model has the potential to support real-time and large-scale flood mapping applications in the future.
Alireza Amani, Marie-Amélie Boucher, Alexandre R. Cabral, Vincent Vionnet, and Étienne Gaborit
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 29, 2445–2465, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-2445-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-2445-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Accurately estimating groundwater recharge using numerical models is particularly difficult in cold regions with snow and soil freezing. This study evaluated a physics-based model against high-resolution field measurements. Our findings highlight a need for a better representation of soil-freezing processes, offering a roadmap for future model development. This leads to more accurate models to aid in water resource management decisions in cold climates.
Benoit Montpetit, Julien Meloche, Vincent Vionnet, Chris Derksen, Georgina Wooley, Nicolas R. Leroux, Paul Siqueira, J. Max Adams, and Mike Brady
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2317, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2317, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This paper presents the workflow to retrieve snow water equivalent from radar measurements for the future Canadian radar satellite mission, TSMM. The workflow is validated by using airborne radar data collected at Trail Valley Creek, Canada, during winter 2018–19. We detail important considerations to have in the context of an Earth Observation mission over a vast region such as Canada. The results show that it is possible to achieve the desired accuracy for TSMM, over an Arctic environment.
Georgina J. Woolley, Nick Rutter, Leanne Wake, Vincent Vionnet, Chris Derksen, Julien Meloche, Benoit Montpetit, Nicolas R. Leroux, Richard Essery, Gabriel Hould Gosselin, and Philip Marsh
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1498, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1498, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for The Cryosphere (TC).
Short summary
Short summary
The impact of uncertainties in the simulation of snow density and SSA by the snow model Crocus (embedded within the Soil, Vegetation and Snow version 2 land surface model) on the simulation of snow backscatter (13.5 GHz) using the Snow Microwave Radiative Transfer model were quantified. The simulation of SSA was found to be a key model uncertainty. Underestimated SSA values lead to high errors in the simulation of snow backscatter, reduced by implementing a minimum SSA value (8.7 m2 kg-1).
Martin Gauch, Frederik Kratzert, Daniel Klotz, Grey Nearing, Deborah Cohen, and Oren Gilon
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1224, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1224, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Missing input data are one of the most common challenges when building deep learning hydrological models. We present and analyze different methods that can produce predictions when certain inputs are missing during training or inference. Our proposed strategies provide high accuracy while allowing for more flexible data handling and being robust to outages in operational scenarios.
Eduardo Acuña Espinoza, Frederik Kratzert, Daniel Klotz, Martin Gauch, Manuel Álvarez Chaves, Ralf Loritz, and Uwe Ehret
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 29, 1749–1758, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-1749-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-1749-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Long short-term memory (LSTM) networks have demonstrated state-of-the-art performance for rainfall-runoff hydrological modelling. However, most studies focus on predictions at a daily scale, limiting the benefits of sub-daily (e.g. hourly) predictions in applications like flood forecasting. In this study, we introduce a new architecture, multi-frequency LSTM (MF-LSTM), designed to use inputs of various temporal frequencies to produce sub-daily (e.g. hourly) predictions at a moderate computational cost.
Maria Staudinger, Anna Herzog, Ralf Loritz, Tobias Houska, Sandra Pool, Diana Spieler, Paul D. Wagner, Juliane Mai, Jens Kiesel, Stephan Thober, Björn Guse, and Uwe Ehret
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1076, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1076, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Four process-based and four data-driven hydrological models are compared using different training data. We found process-based models to perform better with small data sets but stop learning soon, while data-driven models learn longer. The study highlights the importance of memory in data and the impact of different data sampling methods on model performance. The direct comparison of these models is novel and provides a clear understanding of their performance under various data conditions.
Eduardo Acuña Espinoza, Ralf Loritz, Frederik Kratzert, Daniel Klotz, Martin Gauch, Manuel Álvarez Chaves, and Uwe Ehret
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 29, 1277–1294, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-1277-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-1277-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Data-driven techniques have shown the potential to outperform process-based models in rainfall–runoff simulations. Hybrid models, combining both approaches, aim to enhance accuracy and maintain interpretability. Expanding the set of test cases to evaluate hybrid models under different conditions, we test their generalization capabilities for extreme hydrological events.
Manon Gaillard, Vincent Vionnet, Matthieu Lafaysse, Marie Dumont, and Paul Ginoux
The Cryosphere, 19, 769–792, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-19-769-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-19-769-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study presents an efficient method to improve large-scale snow albedo simulations by considering the spatial variability in light-absorbing particles (LAPs) like black carbon and dust. A global climatology of LAP deposition was created and used to optimize a parameter in the Crocus snow model. Testing at 10 global sites improved albedo predictions by 10 % on average and over 25 % in the Arctic. This method can enhance other snow models' predictions without complex simulations.
Sanika Baste, Daniel Klotz, Eduardo Acuña Espinoza, Andras Bardossy, and Ralf Loritz
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-425, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-425, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study evaluates the extrapolation performance of Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) networks in rainfall-runoff modeling, specifically under extreme conditions. The findings reveal that the LSTM cannot predict discharge values beyond a theoretical limit, which is well below the extremity of its training data. This behavior results from the LSTM's gating structures rather than saturation of cell states alone.
Daniel Klotz, Peter Miersch, Thiago V. M. do Nascimento, Fabrizio Fenicia, Martin Gauch, and Jakob Zscheischler
Earth Syst. Sci. Data Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-450, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-450, 2025
Revised manuscript under review for ESSD
Short summary
Short summary
Data availability is central to hydrological science. It is the basis for advancing our understanding of hydrological processes, building prediction models, and anticipatory water management. We present a data-driven daily runoff reconstruction product for natural streamflow. We name it EARLS: European aggregated reconstruction for large-sample studies. The reconstructions represent daily simulations of natural streamflow across Europe and cover the period from 1953 to 2020.
Georgina J. Woolley, Nick Rutter, Leanne Wake, Vincent Vionnet, Chris Derksen, Richard Essery, Philip Marsh, Rosamond Tutton, Branden Walker, Matthieu Lafaysse, and David Pritchard
The Cryosphere, 18, 5685–5711, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-5685-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-5685-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Parameterisations of Arctic snow processes were implemented into the multi-physics ensemble version of the snow model Crocus (embedded within the Soil, Vegetation, and Snow version 2 land surface model) and evaluated at an Arctic tundra site. Optimal combinations of parameterisations that improved the simulation of density and specific surface area featured modifications that raise wind speeds to increase compaction in surface layers, prevent snowdrift, and increase viscosity in basal layers.
Raoul A. Collenteur, Ezra Haaf, Mark Bakker, Tanja Liesch, Andreas Wunsch, Jenny Soonthornrangsan, Jeremy White, Nick Martin, Rui Hugman, Ed de Sousa, Didier Vanden Berghe, Xinyang Fan, Tim J. Peterson, Jānis Bikše, Antoine Di Ciacca, Xinyue Wang, Yang Zheng, Maximilian Nölscher, Julian Koch, Raphael Schneider, Nikolas Benavides Höglund, Sivarama Krishna Reddy Chidepudi, Abel Henriot, Nicolas Massei, Abderrahim Jardani, Max Gustav Rudolph, Amir Rouhani, J. Jaime Gómez-Hernández, Seifeddine Jomaa, Anna Pölz, Tim Franken, Morteza Behbooei, Jimmy Lin, and Rojin Meysami
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 5193–5208, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-5193-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-5193-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We show the results of the 2022 Groundwater Time Series Modelling Challenge; 15 teams applied data-driven models to simulate hydraulic heads, and three model groups were identified: lumped, machine learning, and deep learning. For all wells, reasonable performance was obtained by at least one team from each group. There was not one team that performed best for all wells. In conclusion, the challenge was a successful initiative to compare different models and learn from each other.
Frédéric Talbot, Jean-Daniel Sylvain, Guillaume Drolet, Annie Poulin, and Richard Arsenault
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3353, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3353, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This research explores different modelling approaches within a distributed and physically based hydrological model, emphasizing configurations that integrate groundwater recharge and dynamics. The study demonstrates that precise adjustments in model calibration can enhance the accuracy and representation of hydrological variables, which are crucial for effective water management and climate change adaptation strategies.
Claudia Färber, Henning Plessow, Simon Mischel, Frederik Kratzert, Nans Addor, Guy Shalev, and Ulrich Looser
Earth Syst. Sci. Data Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-427, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-427, 2024
Revised manuscript accepted for ESSD
Short summary
Short summary
Large-sample datasets are essential in hydrological science to support modelling studies and advance process understanding. Caravan is a community initiative to create a large-sample hydrology dataset of meteorological forcing data, catchment attributes, and discharge data for catchments around the world. This dataset is a subset of hydrological discharge data and station-based watersheds from the Global Runoff Data Centre (GRDC), which are covered by an open data policy.
Frédéric Talbot, Simon Ricard, Jean-Daniel Sylvain, Guillaume Drolet, Annie Poulin, Jean-Luc Martel, and Richard Arsenault
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3037, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3037, 2024
Preprint archived
Short summary
Short summary
This study compares two hydrological modeling approaches for assessing climate change impacts on water systems. We evaluate the conventional method alongside the asynchronous method, which excels in capturing extreme events but faces challenges with event timing. Our findings suggest that a semi-asynchronous approach, blending the strengths of both methods, could offer better results. This research provides key insights for supporting sustainable resource planning in a changing climate.
Giulia Mazzotti, Jari-Pekka Nousu, Vincent Vionnet, Tobias Jonas, Rafife Nheili, and Matthieu Lafaysse
The Cryosphere, 18, 4607–4632, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-4607-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-4607-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
As many boreal and alpine forests have seasonal snow, models are needed to predict forest snow under future environmental conditions. We have created a new forest snow model by combining existing, very detailed model components for the canopy and the snowpack. We applied it to forests in Switzerland and Finland and showed how complex forest cover leads to a snowpack layering that is very variable in space and time because different processes prevail at different locations in the forest.
Anne F. Van Loon, Sarra Kchouk, Alessia Matanó, Faranak Tootoonchi, Camila Alvarez-Garreton, Khalid E. A. Hassaballah, Minchao Wu, Marthe L. K. Wens, Anastasiya Shyrokaya, Elena Ridolfi, Riccardo Biella, Viorica Nagavciuc, Marlies H. Barendrecht, Ana Bastos, Louise Cavalcante, Franciska T. de Vries, Margaret Garcia, Johanna Mård, Ileen N. Streefkerk, Claudia Teutschbein, Roshanak Tootoonchi, Ruben Weesie, Valentin Aich, Juan P. Boisier, Giuliano Di Baldassarre, Yiheng Du, Mauricio Galleguillos, René Garreaud, Monica Ionita, Sina Khatami, Johanna K. L. Koehler, Charles H. Luce, Shreedhar Maskey, Heidi D. Mendoza, Moses N. Mwangi, Ilias G. Pechlivanidis, Germano G. Ribeiro Neto, Tirthankar Roy, Robert Stefanski, Patricia Trambauer, Elizabeth A. Koebele, Giulia Vico, and Micha Werner
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 3173–3205, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-3173-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-3173-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Drought is a creeping phenomenon but is often still analysed and managed like an isolated event, without taking into account what happened before and after. Here, we review the literature and analyse five cases to discuss how droughts and their impacts develop over time. We find that the responses of hydrological, ecological, and social systems can be classified into four types and that the systems interact. We provide suggestions for further research and monitoring, modelling, and management.
Frederik Kratzert, Martin Gauch, Daniel Klotz, and Grey Nearing
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 4187–4201, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-4187-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-4187-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Recently, a special type of neural-network architecture became increasingly popular in hydrology literature. However, in most applications, this model was applied as a one-to-one replacement for hydrology models without adapting or rethinking the experimental setup. In this opinion paper, we show how this is almost always a bad decision and how using these kinds of models requires the use of large-sample hydrology data sets.
Louise Arnal, Martyn P. Clark, Alain Pietroniro, Vincent Vionnet, David R. Casson, Paul H. Whitfield, Vincent Fortin, Andrew W. Wood, Wouter J. M. Knoben, Brandi W. Newton, and Colleen Walford
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 4127–4155, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-4127-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-4127-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Forecasting river flow months in advance is crucial for water sectors and society. In North America, snowmelt is a key driver of flow. This study presents a statistical workflow using snow data to forecast flow months ahead in North American snow-fed rivers. Variations in the river flow predictability across the continent are evident, raising concerns about future predictability in a changing (snow) climate. The reproducible workflow hosted on GitHub supports collaborative and open science.
Andreas Auer, Martin Gauch, Frederik Kratzert, Grey Nearing, Sepp Hochreiter, and Daniel Klotz
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 4099–4126, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-4099-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-4099-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This work examines the impact of temporal and spatial information on the uncertainty estimation of streamflow forecasts. The study emphasizes the importance of data updates and global information for precise uncertainty estimates. We use conformal prediction to show that recent data enhance the estimates, even if only available infrequently. Local data yield reasonable average estimations but fall short for peak-flow events. The use of global data significantly improves these predictions.
Benoit Montpetit, Joshua King, Julien Meloche, Chris Derksen, Paul Siqueira, J. Max Adam, Peter Toose, Mike Brady, Anna Wendleder, Vincent Vionnet, and Nicolas R. Leroux
The Cryosphere, 18, 3857–3874, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-3857-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-3857-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This paper validates the use of free open-source models to link distributed snow measurements to radar measurements in the Canadian Arctic. Using multiple radar sensors, we can decouple the soil from the snow contribution. We then retrieve the "microwave snow grain size" to characterize the interaction between the snow mass and the radar signal. This work supports future satellite mission development to retrieve snow mass information such as the future Canadian Terrestrial Snow Mass Mission.
Jean-Luc Martel, Richard Arsenault, Richard Turcotte, Mariana Castañeda-Gonzalez, François Brissette, William Armstrong, Edouard Mailhot, Jasmine Pelletier-Dumont, Simon Lachance-Cloutier, Gabriel Rondeau-Genesse, and Louis-Philippe Caron
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2134, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2134, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This study explores six methods to improve the ability of Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) neural networks to predict peak streamflows, crucial for flood analysis. By enhancing data inputs and model techniques, the research shows LSTM models can match or surpass traditional hydrological models in simulating peak flows. Tested on 88 catchments in Quebec, Canada, these methods offer promising strategies for better flood prediction.
Daniel Klotz, Martin Gauch, Frederik Kratzert, Grey Nearing, and Jakob Zscheischler
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 3665–3673, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-3665-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-3665-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The evaluation of model performance is essential for hydrological modeling. Using performance criteria requires a deep understanding of their properties. We focus on a counterintuitive aspect of the Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE) and show that if we divide the data into multiple parts, the overall performance can be higher than all the evaluations of the subsets. Although this follows from the definition of the NSE, the resulting behavior can have unintended consequences in practice.
Ange Haddjeri, Matthieu Baron, Matthieu Lafaysse, Louis Le Toumelin, César Deschamps-Berger, Vincent Vionnet, Simon Gascoin, Matthieu Vernay, and Marie Dumont
The Cryosphere, 18, 3081–3116, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-3081-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-18-3081-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Our study addresses the complex challenge of evaluating distributed alpine snow simulations with snow transport against snow depths from Pléiades stereo imagery and snow melt-out dates from Sentinel-2 and Landsat-8 satellites. Additionally, we disentangle error contributions between blowing snow, precipitation heterogeneity, and unresolved subgrid variability. Snow transport enhances the snow simulations at high elevations, while precipitation biases are the main error source in other areas.
Mehrad Rahimpour Asenjan, Francois Brissette, Richard Arsenault, and Jean-Luc Martel
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-1183, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-1183, 2024
Preprint archived
Short summary
Short summary
Our study examines how combining climate models impacts future streamflow predictions, crucial for understanding climate change. Comparing six methods across 3,107 North American catchments, we found unequal weighting significantly improves rainfall and temperature projections. However, for streamflow, both equal and unequal weighting perform similarly with bias correction. Our findings underscore the need to carefully select weighting methods and correct biases for accurate climate projections.
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
Short summary
It is challenging to incorporate input variables' spatial distribution information when implementing long short-term memory (LSTM) models for streamflow prediction. This work presents a novel hybrid modelling approach to predict streamflow while accounting for spatial variability. We evaluated the performance against lumped LSTM predictions in 224 basins across the Great Lakes region in North America. This approach shows promise for predicting streamflow in large, ungauged basin.
Matthieu Baron, Ange Haddjeri, Matthieu Lafaysse, Louis Le Toumelin, Vincent Vionnet, and Mathieu Fructus
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 1297–1326, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1297-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-1297-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Increasing the spatial resolution of numerical systems simulating snowpack evolution in mountain areas requires representing small-scale processes such as wind-induced snow transport. We present SnowPappus, a simple scheme coupled with the Crocus snow model to compute blowing-snow fluxes and redistribute snow among grid points at 250 m resolution. In terms of numerical cost, it is suitable for large-scale applications. We present point-scale evaluations of fluxes and snow transport occurrence.
Hadleigh D. Thompson, Julie M. Thériault, Stephen J. Déry, Ronald E. Stewart, Dominique Boisvert, Lisa Rickard, Nicolas R. Leroux, Matteo Colli, and Vincent Vionnet
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 15, 5785–5806, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-5785-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-5785-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The Saint John River experiment on Cold Season Storms was conducted in northwest New Brunswick, Canada, to investigate the types of precipitation that can lead to ice jams and flooding along the river. We deployed meteorological instruments, took precipitation measurements and photographs of snowflakes, and launched weather balloons. These data will help us to better understand the atmospheric conditions that can affect local communities and townships downstream during the spring melt season.
Mehrad Rahimpour Asenjan, Francois Brissette, Jean-Luc Martel, and Richard Arsenault
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 27, 4355–4367, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-4355-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-4355-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Climate models are central to climate change impact studies. Some models project a future deemed too hot by many. We looked at how including hot models may skew the result of impact studies. Applied to hydrology, this study shows that hot models do not systematically produce hydrological outliers.
Samah Larabi, Juliane Mai, Markus Schnorbus, Bryan A. Tolson, and Francis Zwiers
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 27, 3241–3263, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-3241-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-3241-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The computational cost of sensitivity analysis (SA) becomes prohibitive for large hydrologic modeling domains. Here, using a large-scale Variable Infiltration Capacity (VIC) deployment, we show that watershed classification helps identify the spatial pattern of parameter sensitivity within the domain at a reduced cost. Findings reveal the opportunity to leverage climate and land cover attributes to reduce the cost of SA and facilitate more rapid deployment of large-scale land surface models.
Robert Chlumsky, Juliane Mai, James R. Craig, and Bryan A. Tolson
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2023-69, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2023-69, 2023
Revised manuscript not accepted
Short summary
Short summary
A blended model allows multiple hydrologic processes to be represented in a single model, which allows for a model to achieve high performance without the need to modify its structure for different catchments. Here, we improve upon the initial blended version by testing more than 30 blended models in twelve catchments to improve the overall model performance. We validate our proposed, updated blended model version with independent catchments, and make this version available for open use.
Richard Arsenault, Jean-Luc Martel, Frédéric Brunet, François Brissette, and Juliane Mai
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 27, 139–157, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-139-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-139-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Predicting flow in rivers where no observation records are available is a daunting task. For decades, hydrological models were set up on these gauges, and their parameters were estimated based on the hydrological response of similar or nearby catchments where records exist. New developments in machine learning have now made it possible to estimate flows at ungauged locations more precisely than with hydrological models. This study confirms the performance superiority of machine learning models.
Grey S. Nearing, Daniel Klotz, Jonathan M. Frame, Martin Gauch, Oren Gilon, Frederik Kratzert, Alden Keefe Sampson, Guy Shalev, and Sella Nevo
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 5493–5513, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-5493-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-5493-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
When designing flood forecasting models, it is necessary to use all available data to achieve the most accurate predictions possible. This manuscript explores two basic ways of ingesting near-real-time streamflow data into machine learning streamflow models. The point we want to make is that when working in the context of machine learning (instead of traditional hydrology models that are based on
bio-geophysics), it is not necessary to use complex statistical methods for injecting sparse data.
Dikraa Khedhaouiria, Stéphane Bélair, Vincent Fortin, Guy Roy, and Franck Lespinas
Nonlin. Processes Geophys., 29, 329–344, https://doi.org/10.5194/npg-29-329-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/npg-29-329-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
This study introduces a well-known use of hybrid methods in data assimilation (DA) algorithms that has not yet been explored for precipitation analyses. Our approach combined an ensemble-based DA approach with an existing deterministically based DA. Both DA scheme families have desirable aspects that can be leveraged if combined. The DA hybrid method showed better precipitation analyses in regions with a low rate of assimilated surface observations, which is typically the case in winter.
Robert Chlumsky, James R. Craig, Simon G. M. Lin, Sarah Grass, Leland Scantlebury, Genevieve Brown, and Rezgar Arabzadeh
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 7017–7030, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-7017-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-7017-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We introduce the open-source RavenR package, which has been built to support the use of the hydrologic modelling framework Raven. The R package contains many functions that may be useful in each step of the model-building process, including preparing model input files, running the model, and analyzing the outputs. We present six reproducible use cases of the RavenR package for the Liard River basin in Canada to demonstrate how it may be deployed.
Sella Nevo, Efrat Morin, Adi Gerzi Rosenthal, Asher Metzger, Chen Barshai, Dana Weitzner, Dafi Voloshin, Frederik Kratzert, Gal Elidan, Gideon Dror, Gregory Begelman, Grey Nearing, Guy Shalev, Hila Noga, Ira Shavitt, Liora Yuklea, Moriah Royz, Niv Giladi, Nofar Peled Levi, Ofir Reich, Oren Gilon, Ronnie Maor, Shahar Timnat, Tal Shechter, Vladimir Anisimov, Yotam Gigi, Yuval Levin, Zach Moshe, Zvika Ben-Haim, Avinatan Hassidim, and Yossi Matias
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 4013–4032, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-4013-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-4013-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Early flood warnings are one of the most effective tools to save lives and goods. Machine learning (ML) models can improve flood prediction accuracy but their use in operational frameworks is limited. The paper presents a flood warning system, operational in India and Bangladesh, that uses ML models for forecasting river stage and flood inundation maps and discusses the models' performances. In 2021, more than 100 million flood alerts were sent to people near rivers over an area of 470 000 km2.
Jonathan M. Frame, Frederik Kratzert, Daniel Klotz, Martin Gauch, Guy Shalev, Oren Gilon, Logan M. Qualls, Hoshin V. Gupta, and Grey S. Nearing
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 3377–3392, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-3377-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-3377-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The most accurate rainfall–runoff predictions are currently based on deep learning. There is a concern among hydrologists that deep learning models may not be reliable in extrapolation or for predicting extreme events. This study tests that hypothesis. The deep learning models remained relatively accurate in predicting extreme events compared with traditional models, even when extreme events were not included in the training set.
Thomas Lees, Steven Reece, Frederik Kratzert, Daniel Klotz, Martin Gauch, Jens De Bruijn, Reetik Kumar Sahu, Peter Greve, Louise Slater, and Simon J. Dadson
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 3079–3101, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-3079-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-3079-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Despite the accuracy of deep learning rainfall-runoff models, we are currently uncertain of what these models have learned. In this study we explore the internals of one deep learning architecture and demonstrate that the model learns about intermediate hydrological stores of soil moisture and snow water, despite never having seen data about these processes during training. Therefore, we find evidence that the deep learning approach learns a physically realistic mapping from inputs to outputs.
Michelle Viswanathan, Tobias K. D. Weber, Sebastian Gayler, Juliane Mai, and Thilo Streck
Biogeosciences, 19, 2187–2209, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-19-2187-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-19-2187-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We analysed the evolution of model parameter uncertainty and prediction error as we updated parameters of a maize phenology model based on yearly observations, by sequentially applying Bayesian calibration. Although parameter uncertainty was reduced, prediction quality deteriorated when calibration and prediction data were from different maize ripening groups or temperature conditions. The study highlights that Bayesian methods should account for model limitations and inherent data structures.
Daniel Klotz, Frederik Kratzert, Martin Gauch, Alden Keefe Sampson, Johannes Brandstetter, Günter Klambauer, Sepp Hochreiter, and Grey Nearing
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 1673–1693, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-1673-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-1673-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
This contribution evaluates distributional runoff predictions from deep-learning-based approaches. We propose a benchmarking setup and establish four strong baselines. The results show that accurate, precise, and reliable uncertainty estimation can be achieved with deep learning.
Vincent Vionnet, Colleen Mortimer, Mike Brady, Louise Arnal, and Ross Brown
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 13, 4603–4619, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-4603-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-4603-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Water equivalent of snow cover (SWE) is a key variable for water management, hydrological forecasting and climate monitoring. A new Canadian SWE dataset (CanSWE) is presented in this paper. It compiles data collected by multiple agencies and companies at more than 2500 different locations across Canada over the period 1928–2020. Snow depth and derived bulk snow density are also included when available.
Nicolas Gasset, Vincent Fortin, Milena Dimitrijevic, Marco Carrera, Bernard Bilodeau, Ryan Muncaster, Étienne Gaborit, Guy Roy, Nedka Pentcheva, Maxim Bulat, Xihong Wang, Radenko Pavlovic, Franck Lespinas, Dikra Khedhaouiria, and Juliane Mai
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 4917–4945, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-4917-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-4917-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
In this paper, we highlight the importance of including land-data assimilation as well as offline precipitation analysis components in a regional reanalysis system. We also document the performance of the first multidecadal 10 km reanalysis performed with the GEM atmospheric model that can be used for seamless land-surface and hydrological modelling in North America. It is of particular interest for transboundary basins, as existing datasets often show discontinuities at the border.
Olivia Carpino, Kristine Haynes, Ryan Connon, James Craig, Élise Devoie, and William Quinton
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 3301–3317, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-3301-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-3301-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This study demonstrates how climate warming in peatland-dominated regions of discontinuous permafrost is changing the form and function of the landscape. Key insights into the rates and patterns of such changes in the coming decades are provided through careful identification of land cover transitional stages and characterization of the hydrological and energy balance regimes for each stage.
Mostafa Tarek, François Brissette, and Richard Arsenault
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 3331–3350, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-3331-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-3331-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
It is not known how much uncertainty the choice of a reference data set may bring to impact studies. This study compares precipitation and temperature data sets to evaluate the uncertainty contribution to the results of climate change studies. Results show that all data sets provide good streamflow simulations over the reference period. The reference data sets also provided uncertainty that was equal to or larger than that related to general circulation models over most of the catchments.
André Almagro, Paulo Tarso S. Oliveira, Antônio Alves Meira Neto, Tirthankar Roy, and Peter Troch
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 3105–3135, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-3105-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-3105-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We have collected and synthesized catchment attributes from multiple sources into an extensive dataset, the Catchment Attributes for Brazil (CABra). CABra contains streamflow and climate daily series for 735 catchments in the 1980–2010 period, aside from dozens of attributes of topography, climate, streamflow, groundwater, soil, geology, land cover, and hydrologic disturbance. The CABra intends to pave the way for a better understanding of catchments' behavior in Brazil and the world.
Frederik Kratzert, Daniel Klotz, Sepp Hochreiter, and Grey S. Nearing
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 2685–2703, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-2685-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-2685-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We investigate how deep learning models use different meteorological data sets in the task of (regional) rainfall–runoff modeling. We show that performance can be significantly improved when using different data products as input and further show how the model learns to combine those meteorological input differently across time and space. The results are carefully benchmarked against classical approaches, showing the supremacy of the presented approach.
Martin Gauch, Frederik Kratzert, Daniel Klotz, Grey Nearing, Jimmy Lin, and Sepp Hochreiter
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 2045–2062, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-2045-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-2045-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We present multi-timescale Short-Term Memory (MTS-LSTM), a machine learning approach that predicts discharge at multiple timescales within one model. MTS-LSTM is significantly more accurate than the US National Water Model and computationally more efficient than an individual LSTM model per timescale. Further, MTS-LSTM can process different input variables at different timescales, which is important as the lead time of meteorological forecasts often depends on their temporal resolution.
Vincent Vionnet, Christopher B. Marsh, Brian Menounos, Simon Gascoin, Nicholas E. Wayand, Joseph Shea, Kriti Mukherjee, and John W. Pomeroy
The Cryosphere, 15, 743–769, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-15-743-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-15-743-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Mountain snow cover provides critical supplies of fresh water to downstream users. Its accurate prediction requires inclusion of often-ignored processes. A multi-scale modelling strategy is presented that efficiently accounts for snow redistribution. Model accuracy is assessed via airborne lidar and optical satellite imagery. With redistribution the model captures the elevation–snow depth relation. Redistribution processes are required to reproduce spatial variability, such as around ridges.
Juliane Mai, James R. Craig, and Bryan A. Tolson
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 5835–5858, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-5835-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-5835-2020, 2020
Guoqiang Tang, Martyn P. Clark, Andrew J. Newman, Andrew W. Wood, Simon Michael Papalexiou, Vincent Vionnet, and Paul H. Whitfield
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 12, 2381–2409, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-2381-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-2381-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Station observations are critical for hydrological and meteorological studies, but they often contain missing values and have short measurement periods. This study developed a serially complete dataset for North America (SCDNA) from 1979 to 2018 for 27 276 precipitation and temperature stations. SCDNA is built on multiple data sources and infilling/reconstruction strategies to achieve high-quality estimates which can be used for a variety of applications.
Cited articles
Anderson, E. A.: National Weather Service River Forecast System – Snow accumulation and ablation model, Tech. rep., https://repository.library.noaa.gov/view/noaa/13507 (last access: 6 July 2022), 1973. a
Andreadis, K. M., Schumann, G. J. P., and Pavelsky, T.: A simple global river bankfull width and depth database, Water Resour. Res., 49, 7164–7168, 2013. a
Arnold, J. G., Srinivasan, R., Muttiah, R. S., and Williams, J. R.: Large Area Hydrologic Modeling and Assessment Part I: Model Development, J. Am. Water Resour. As., 34, 73–89, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-1688.1998.tb05961.x, 1998. a
Bernier, N. B., Bélair, S., Bilodeau, B., and Tong, L.: Near-Surface and Land Surface Forecast System of the Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games, J. Hydrometeorol., 12, 508–530, 2011. a
Best, M. J., Abramowitz, G., Johnson, H. R., Pitman, A. J., Balsamo, G., Boone, A., Cuntz, M., Decharme, B., Dirmeyer, P. A., Dong, J., Ek, M., Guo, Z., Haverd, V., van den Hurk, B. J. J., Nearing, G. S., Pak, B., Peters-Lidard, C., Santanello Jr., J. A., Stevens, L., and Vuichard, N.: The Plumbing of Land Surface Models: Benchmarking Model Performance, J. Hydrometeorol., 16, 1425–1442, 2015. a, b
Craig, J. R.: Raven hydrologic modeling framework website, http://raven.uwaterloo.ca/, last access: 6 July 2022. a
Craig, J. R., Brown, G., Chlumsky, R., Jenkinson, R. W., Jost, G., Lee, K., Mai, J., Serrer, M., Sgro, N., Shafii, M., Snowdon, A. P., and Tolson, B. A.: Flexible watershed simulation with the Raven hydrological modelling framework, Environ. Modell. Softw., 129, 104728, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2020.104728, 2020.
a, b, c
Crowley II, T. E.: Great Lakes basins (USA-Canada) runoff modeling, J. Hydrol., 64, 135–158, 1983. a
Demirel, M. C., Mai, J., Mendiguren, G., Koch, J., Samaniego, L., and Stisen, S.: Combining satellite data and appropriate objective functions for improved spatial pattern performance of a distributed hydrologic model, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 1299–1315, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-1299-2018, 2018. a
Duan, Q., Sorooshian, S., and Gupta, V.: Effective and efficient global optimization for conceptual rainfall-runoff models, Water Resour. Res., 28, 1015–1031, 1992. a
Duan, Q., Schaake, J., Andréassian, V., Franks, S., Goteti, G., Gupta, H. V., Gusev, Y. M., Habets, F., Hall, A., Hay, L., Hogue, T., Huang, M., Leavesley, G., Liang, X., Nasonova, O. N., Noilhan, J., Oudin, L., Sorooshian, S., Wagener, T., and Wood, E. F.: Model Parameter Estimation Experiment (MOPEX): An overview of science strategy and major results from the second and third workshops, J. Hydrol., 320, 3–17, 2006. a
Durnford, D., Carrera, M., Dupont, F., Deacu, D., Gaborit, É., Garnaud, C., Fortin, V., Bélair, S., Lespinas, F., Bilodeau, B., Khedhaouriria, D., Gauthier, N., Roy, G., Matte, P., Vionnet, V., Badawy, B., Liu, X., Bekcic, B., Shin, L., Champoux, O., Abahamowicz, M., Keita, S., Morales-Marin, L., Morin, J., Hata, Y., and Martinez, Y.: Hydrological Prediction Systems at Environment and Climate Change Canada, in: American Meteorological Society 101st Annual Meeting, 10–15 January 2021, virtual conference, 586–597, 2021. a
ESA: Land Cover CCI vegetation cover, http://maps.elie.ucl.ac.be/CCI/viewer/download.php (last access: 6 December 2021), 2015. a
Feng, D., Lawson, K., and Shen, C.: Mitigating Prediction Error of Deep Learning Streamflow Models in Large Data-Sparse Regions With Ensemble Modeling and Soft Data, Geophys. Res. Lett., 48, e2021GL092999, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021GL092999, 2021. a
Fry, L. M., Gronewold, A. D., Fortin, V., Buan, S., Clites, A. H., Luukkonen, C., Holtschlag, D., Diamond, L., Hunter, T., Seglenieks, F., Durnford, D., Dimitrijevic, M., Subich, C., Klyszejko, E., Kea, K., and Restrepo, P.: The Great Lakes Runoff Intercomparison Project Phase 1: Lake Michigan (GRIP-M), J. Hydrol., 519, 3448–3465, 2014. a, b
Gaborit, É., Ricard, S., Lachance-Cloutier, S., Anctil, F., and Turcotte, R.: Comparing global and local calibration schemes from a differential split-sample test perspective, Can. J. Earth Sci., 52, 990–999, 2015. a
Gaborit, É., Fortin, V., Xu, X., Seglenieks, F., Tolson, B., Fry, L. M., Hunter, T., Anctil, F., and Gronewold, A. D.: A hydrological prediction system based on the SVS land-surface scheme: efficient calibration of GEM-Hydro for streamflow simulation over the Lake Ontario basin, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 4825–4839, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-4825-2017, 2017b. a, b, c
Gasset, N., Fortin, V., Dimitrijevic, M., Carrera, M., Bilodeau, B., Muncaster, R., Gaborit, É., Roy, G., Pentcheva, N., Bulat, M., Wang, X., Pavlovic, R., Lespinas, F., Khedhaouiria, D., and Mai, J.: A 10 km North American precipitation and land-surface reanalysis based on the GEM atmospheric model, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 4917–4945, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-4917-2021, 2021. a, b, c
Gauch, M., Kratzert, F., Klotz, D., Nearing, G., Lin, J., and Hochreiter, S.: Rainfall–runoff prediction at multiple timescales with a single Long Short-Term Memory network, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 2045–2062, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-2045-2021, 2021. a
Gronewold, A. D., Hunter, T., Allison, J., Fry, L. M., Kompoltowicz, K. A., Bolinger, R. A., and Pei, L.: Project Documentation Report for Great Lakes seasonal and inter-annual water supply forecasting improvements project Phase I: Research and Development, Tech. rep., NOAA-GLERL, Ann Arbor, MI, https://www.glerl.noaa.gov/pubs/fulltext/2018/20180020.pdf (last access: 16 December 2021), 2017. a
Haghnegahdar, A., Tolson, B. A., Craig, J. R., and Paya, K. T.: Assessing the performance of a semi-distributed hydrological model under various watershed discretization schemes, Hydrol. Process., 29, 4018–4031, 2015. a
Hamman, J. J., Nijssen, B., Bohn, T. J., Gergel, D. R., and Mao, Y.: The Variable Infiltration Capacity model version 5 (VIC-5): infrastructure improvements for new applications and reproducibility, Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 3481–3496, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-3481-2018, 2018. a
Han, M.: BasinMaker GIS Toolbox v1.0, GitHub [code], https://github.com/dustming/basinmaker/releases/tag/v1.0 (last access: 19 January 2022), 2021. a
Han, M., Mai, J., Tolson, B. A., Craig, J. R., Gaborit, É., Liu, H., and Lee, K.: Subwatershed-based lake and river routing products for hydrologic and land surface models applied over Canada, Can. Water Resour. J., 45, 237–251, https://doi.org/10.1080/07011784.2020.1772116, 2020. a, b
Han, M., Shen, H., Tolson, B. A., Craig, J. R., Mai, J., Lin, S., Basu, N., and Awol, F.: North American Lake-River Routing Product v 2.1, derived by BasinMaker GIS Toolbox, Zenodo [data set], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4728185, 2021b. a
Hargreaves, G. H. and Samani, Z. A.: Reference crop evapotranspiration from temperature, Appl. Eng. Agric., 1, 96–99, 1985. a
Herath, H. M. V. V., Chadalawada, J., and Babovic, V.: Hydrologically informed machine learning for rainfall–runoff modelling: towards distributed modelling, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 4373–4401, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-4373-2021, 2021. a
Hochreiter, S. and Schmidhuber, J.: Long Short-Term Memory, Neural Comput., 9, 1735–1780, https://doi.org/10.1162/neco.1997.9.8.1735, 1997. a
Husain, S. Z., Alavi, N., Bélair, S., Carrera, M., Zhang, S., Fortin, V., Abrahamowicz, M., and Gauthier, N.: The Multibudget Soil, Vegetation, and Snow (SVS) Scheme for Land Surface Parameterization: Offline Warm Season Evaluation, J. Hydrometeorol., 17, 2293–2313, 2016. a
HydroSHEDS: HydroSHEDS website, https://www.hydrosheds.org/, last access: 3 March 2021. a
Klotz, D., Kratzert, F., Gauch, M., Keefe Sampson, A., Brandstetter, J., Klambauer, G., Hochreiter, S., and Nearing, G.: Uncertainty estimation with deep learning for rainfall–runoff modeling, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 1673–1693, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-1673-2022, 2022. a
Kouwen, N.: WATFLOOD: a Micro-Computer Based Flood Forecasting System Based on Real-Time Weather Radar, Can. Water Resour. J., 13, 62–77, https://doi.org/10.4296/cwrj1301062, 1988. a
Kouwen, N., Soulis, E. D., Pietroniro, A., Donald, J., and Harrington, R. A.: Grouped response units for distributed hydrologic modeling, J. Water Res. Pl.-ASCE, 119, 289–305, 1993. a
Kratzert, F., Klotz, D., Brenner, C., Schulz, K., and Herrnegger, M.: Rainfall–runoff modelling using Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) networks, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 6005–6022, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-6005-2018, 2018. a
Kratzert, F., Herrnegger, M., Klotz, D., Hochreiter, S., and Klambauer, G.: NeuralHydrology – Interpreting LSTMs in Hydrology, Springer International Publishing, Cham, 347–362, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28954-6_19, 2019a. a
Kratzert, F., Klotz, D., Herrnegger, M., Sampson, A. K., Hochreiter, S., and Nearing, G. S.: Toward Improved Predictions in Ungauged Basins: Exploiting the Power of Machine Learning, Water Resour. Res., 55, 11344–11354, 2019b. a
Kratzert, F., Klotz, D., Shalev, G., Klambauer, G., Hochreiter, S., and Nearing, G.: Towards learning universal, regional, and local hydrological behaviors via machine learning applied to large-sample datasets, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 5089–5110, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-5089-2019, 2019c. a, b, c
Kratzert, F., Gauch, M., Nearing, G. S., and Klotz, D.: NeuralHydrology – A Python library for Deep Learning research in hydrology, Journal of Open Source Software, 7, 4050, 2022. a
Lees, T., Buechel, M., Anderson, B., Slater, L., Reece, S., Coxon, G., and Dadson, S. J.: Benchmarking data-driven rainfall–runoff models in Great Britain: a comparison of long short-term memory (LSTM)-based models with four lumped conceptual models, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 5517–5534, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-5517-2021, 2021. a
Lees, T., Reece, S., Kratzert, F., Klotz, D., Gauch, M., De Bruijn, J., Kumar Sahu, R., Greve, P., Slater, L., and Dadson, S. J.: Hydrological concept formation inside long short-term memory (LSTM) networks, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 3079–3101, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-3079-2022, 2022. a, b
Leonardini, G., Anctil, F., Vionnet, V., Abrahamowicz, M., Nadeau, D. F., and Fortin, V.: Evaluation of the Snow Cover in the Soil, Vegetation, and Snow (SVS) Land Surface Model, J. Hydrometeorol., 22, 1663–1680, https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-20-0249.1, 2021. a, b
Liang, X., Lettenmaier, D. P., Wood, E. F., and Burges, S. J.: A simple hydrologically based model of land surface water and energy fluxes for general circulation models, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 99, 14415–14428, https://doi.org/10.1029/94JD00483, 1994. a
Lofgren, B. M., Hunter, T. S., and Wilbarger, J.: Effects of using air temperature as a proxy for potential evapotranspiration in climate change scenarios of Great Lakes basin hydrology, J. Great Lakes Res., 37, 744–752, 2011. a
Mai, J., Craig, J. R., and Tolson, B. A.: Simultaneously determining global sensitivities of model parameters and model structure, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 5835–5858, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-5835-2020, 2020a. a
Mai, J., Kornelsen, K. C., Tolson, B. A., Fortin, V., Gasset, N., Bouhemhem, D., Schäfer, D., Leahy, M., Anctil, F., and Coulibaly, P.: The Canadian Surface Prediction Archive (CaSPAr): A Platform to Enhance Environmental Modeling in Canada and Globally, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 101, E341–E356, 2020b. a
Mai, J., Tolson, B. A., Shen, H., Gaborit, É., Fortin, V., Gasset, N., Awoye, H., Stadnyk, T. A., Fry, L. M., Bradley, E. A., Seglenieks, F., Temgoua, A. G. T., Princz, D. G., Gharari, S., Haghnegahdar, A., Elshamy, M. E., Razavi, S., Gauch, M., Lin, J., Ni, X., Yuan, Y., McLeod, M., Basu, N. B., Kumar, R., Rakovec, O., Samaniego, L., Attinger, S., Shrestha, N. K., Daggupati, P., Roy, T., Wi, S., Hunter, T., Craig, J. R., and Pietroniro, A.: Great Lakes Runoff Intercomparison Project Phase 3: Lake Erie (GRIP-E), J. Hydrol. Eng., 26, 05021020, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0002097, 2021. a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h
Mai, J., Shen, H., Tolson, B. A., Gaborit, E., Arsenault, R., Craig, J. R., Fortin, V., Fry, L. M., Gauch, M., Klotz, D., Kratzert, F., O'Brien, N., Princz, D. G., Koya, S. R., Roy, T., Seglenieks, F., Shrestha, N. K., Temgoua, A. G. T., Vionnet, V., and Waddell, J. W.: The Great Lakes Runoff Intercomparison Project Phase 4: Lake Erie (GRIP-GL), FRDR [data set and code], https://doi.org/10.20383/103.0598, last access: 22 June 2022. a
Martel, J.-L., Demeester, K., Brissette, F., Poulin, A., and Arsenault, R.: HMETS – A Simple and Efficient Hydrology Model for Teaching Hydrological Modelling, Flow Forecasting and Climate Change Impacts, Int. J. Eng. Educ., 33, 1307–1316, 2017. a
Martens, B., Miralles, D. G., Lievens, H., van der Schalie, R., de Jeu, R. A. M., Fernández-Prieto, D., Beck, H. E., Dorigo, W. A., and Verhoest, N. E. C.: GLEAM v3: satellite-based land evaporation and root-zone soil moisture, Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 1903–1925, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-1903-2017, 2017. a, b
Matott, L. S.: OSTRICH – An Optimization Software Toolkit for Research Involving Computational Heuristics Documentation and User's Guide, State University of New York at Buffalo Center for Computational Research, 17.12.19 edn., http://www.civil.uwaterloo.ca/envmodelling/Ostrich_v17.12.19.zip
(last access: 6 July 2022), 2017. a, b
Mekis, E., Stewart, R. E., Theriault, J. M., Kochtubajda, B., Bonsal, B. R., and Liu, Z.: Near-0 ∘C surface temperature and precipitation type patterns across Canada, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 1741–1761, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-1741-2020, 2020. a
Menard, C. B., Essery, R., Krinner, G., Arduini, G., Bartlett, P., Boone, A., Brutel-Vuilmet, C., Burke, E., Cuntz, M., Dai, Y., Decharme, B., Dutra, E., Fang, X., Fierz, C., Gusev, Y., Hagemann, S., Haverd, V., Kim, H., Lafaysse, M., Marke, T., Nasonova, O., Nitta, T., Niwano, M., Pomeroy, J., Schädler, G., Semenov, V., Smirnova, T., Strasser, U., Swenson, S., Turkov, D., Wever, N., and Yuan, H.: Scientific and human errors in a snow model intercomparison, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 102, 1–46, 2020. a
Messager, M. L., Lehner, B., Grill, G., Nedeva, I., and Schmitt, O.: Estimating the volume and age of water stored in global lakes using a geo-statistical approach, Nat. Commun., 7, 1–11, 2016. a
Mizukami, N., Clark, M. P., Newman, A. J., Wood, A. W., Gutmann, E. D., Nijssen, B., Rakovec, O., and Samaniego, L.: Towards seamless large-domain parameter estimation for hydrologic models, Water Resour. Res., 53, 8020–8040, 2017. a
Muñoz Sabater, J.: ERA5-Land hourly data from 1981 to present, Copernicus Climate Change Service (C3S) Climate Data Store (CDS) [data set], https://doi.org/10.24381/cds.e2161bac, 2019. a, b
NACLMS: NACLMS website,
http://www.cec.org/north-american-environmental-atlas/land-cover-2010-landsat-30m/
(last access: 15 February 2022), 2017. a, b
Natural Resources Canada: National hydro network – NHN – Geobase series, https://open.canada.ca/data/en/dataset/a4b190fe-e090-4e6d-881e-b87956c07977 (last access: 3 March 2021), 2020. a
Nearing, G. S., Kratzert, F., Sampson, A. K., Pelissier, C. S., Klotz, D., Frame, J. M., Prieto, C., and Gupta, H. V.: What Role Does Hydrological Science Play in the Age of Machine Learning?, Water Resour. Res., 57, e2020WR028091, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020WR028091, 2021. a
Newman, A. J., Mizukami, N., Clark, M. P., Wood, A. W., Nijssen, B., and Nearing, G.: Benchmarking of a Physically Based Hydrologic Model, J. Hydrometeorol., 18, 2215–2225, 2017. a
Perrin, C., Michel, C., and Andréassian, V.: Improvement of a parsimonious model for streamflow simulation, J. Hydrol., 279, 275–289, 2003. a
Pietroniro, A., Fortin, V., Kouwen, N., Neal, C., Turcotte, R., Davison, B., Verseghy, D., Soulis, E. D., Caldwell, R., Evora, N., and Pellerin, P.: Development of the MESH modelling system for hydrological ensemble forecasting of the Laurentian Great Lakes at the regional scale, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 11, 1279–1294, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-11-1279-2007, 2007. a
Rakovec, O., Mizukami, N., Kumar, R., Newman, A. J., Thober, S., Wood, A. W., Clark, M. P., and Samaniego, L.: Diagnostic Evaluation of Large-Domain Hydrologic Models Calibrated Across the Contiguous United States, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 124, 13991–14007, 2019. a
Roy, T., Gupta, H. V., Serrat-Capdevila, A., and Valdes, J. B.: Using satellite-based evapotranspiration estimates to improve the structure of a simple conceptual rainfall–runoff model, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 879–896, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-879-2017, 2017. a, b, c, d
Shrestha, N. K., Seglenieks, F., Shen, H., and Mai, J.: SWAT-RAVEN coupled model for enhanced streamflow simulation over the Great Lakes region, in: IAGLR 2021 – 64th Annual Conference on Great Lakes Research, 17–21 May 2021, virtual conference, 1–15, 2021. a
Smith, M., Koren, V., Reed, S., Zhang, Z., Zhang, Y., Moreda, F., Cui, Z., Mizukami, N., Anderson, E. A., and Cosgrove, B. A.: The distributed model intercomparison project – Phase 2: Motivation and design of the Oklahoma experiments, J. Hydrol., 418–419, 3–16, 2012. a
Tijerina, D., Condon, L., FitzGerald, K., Dugger, A., ONeill, M. M., Sampson, K., Gochis, D., and Maxwell, R.: Continental Hydrologic Intercomparison Project, Phase 1: A Large-Scale Hydrologic Model Comparison Over the Continental United States, Water Resour. Res., 57, e2020WR028931, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020WR028931, 2021. a
Tolson, B. A. and Shoemaker, C. A.: Dynamically dimensioned search algorithm for computationally efficient watershed model calibration, Water Resour. Res., 43, W01413, https://doi.org/10.1029/2005WR004723, 2007. a
Tong, R., Parajka, J., Salentinig, A., Pfeil, I., Komma, J., Széles, B., Kubáň, M., Valent, P., Vreugdenhil, M., Wagner, W., and Blöschl, G.: The value of ASCAT soil moisture and MODIS snow cover data for calibrating a conceptual hydrologic model, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 1389–1410, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-1389-2021, 2021. a
US Army Corps of Engineers: Detroit District: Great Lakes Update – Vol. 206: From Record-Lows to Record-Highs in 6 years, https://www.lre.usace.army.mil/Portals/69/docs/GreatLakesInfo/docs/UpdateArticles/update206.pdf?ver=2020-07-01-115844-313 (last access: 1 June 2022), 2020. a
US Army Corps of Engineers: Detroit District: Great Lakes Update – Vol. 206: From Record-Lows to Record-Highs in 6 years, https://www.lre.usace.army.mil/Portals/69/docs/GreatLakesInfo/docs/UpdateArticles/update206.pdf?ver=2020-07-01-115844-313 (last access: 1 June 2022), 2020b.
USGS: USGS EROS Archive – Digital Elevation – Global Multi-resolution Terrain Elevation Data 2010 (GMTED2010), https://doi.org/10.5066/F7J38R2N, 2010. a
USGS: MCD12Q1 v006 MODIS/Terra+Aqua Land Cover Type Yearly L3 Global 500 m SIN Grid, https://lpdaac.usgs.gov/products/mcd12q1v006/ (last access: 3 March 2021), 2019. a
USGS: National Hydrography Dataset, https://www.usgs.gov/core-science-systems/ngp/national-hydrography/national-hydrography-dataset, last access: 3 March 2021. a
Vionnet, V., Mortimer, C., Brady, M., Arnal, L., and Brown, R.: Canadian historical Snow Water Equivalent dataset (CanSWE, 1928–2020), Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 13, 4603–4619, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-13-4603-2021, 2021. a
Xia, Y., Mocko, D. M., Wang, S., Pan, M., Kumar, S. V., Peters-Lidard, C. D., Wei, H., Wang, D., and Ek, M. B.: Comprehensive Evaluation of the Variable Infiltration Capacity (VIC) Model in the North American Land Data Assimilation System, J. Hydrometeorol., 19, 1853–1879, 2018. a
Yassin, F., Razavi, S., Elshamy, M., Davison, B., Sapriza-Azuri, G., and Wheater, H.: Representation and improved parameterization of reservoir operation in hydrological and land-surface models, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 3735–3764, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-3735-2019, 2019. a
Executive editor
The study provides a unique effort undertaken by several research groups in the context of a remarkably instrumented large scale system. The latter is subject to a variety of measurement approaches and techniques and a wide range of models are considered in a remarkable inter-comparison study. Key methodological elements stemming from this very comprehensive work are highly relevant to the broad hydrological community.
The study provides a unique effort undertaken by several research groups in the context of a...
Short summary
Model intercomparison studies are carried out to test various models and compare the quality of their outputs over the same domain. In this study, 13 diverse model setups using the same input data are evaluated over the Great Lakes region. Various model outputs – such as streamflow, evaporation, soil moisture, and amount of snow on the ground – are compared using standardized methods and metrics. The basin-wise model outputs and observations are made available through an interactive website.
Model intercomparison studies are carried out to test various models and compare the quality of...
