Articles | Volume 26, issue 20
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-5341-2022
© 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-26-5341-2022
© Author(s) 2022. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Pitfalls and a feasible solution for using KGE as an informal likelihood function in MCMC methods: DREAM(ZS) as an example
Yan Liu
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Chair of Hydrological Modeling and Water Resources, University of
Freiburg, 79098 Freiburg, Germany
Institute of Groundwater Management, Technical University of Dresden, 01069 Dresden, Germany
Jaime Fernández-Ortega
Department of Geology and Centre of Hydrogeology, University of
Málaga (CEHIUMA), 29071 Málaga, Spain
Matías Mudarra
Department of Geology and Centre of Hydrogeology, University of
Málaga (CEHIUMA), 29071 Málaga, Spain
Andreas Hartmann
Institute of Groundwater Management, Technical University of Dresden, 01069 Dresden, Germany
Chair of Hydrological Modeling and Water Resources, University of
Freiburg, 79098 Freiburg, Germany
Related authors
Robert Reinecke, Annemarie Bäthge, Ricarda Dietrich, Sebastian Gnann, Simon N. Gosling, Danielle Grogan, Andreas Hartmann, Stefan Kollet, Rohini Kumar, Richard Lammers, Sida Liu, Yan Liu, Nils Moosdorf, Bibi Naz, Sara Nazari, Chibuike Orazulike, Yadu Pokhrel, Jacob Schewe, Mikhail Smilovic, Maryna Strokal, Yoshihide Wada, Shan Zuidema, and Inge de Graaf
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1181, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1181, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Here we describe a collaborative effort to improve predictions of how climate change will affect groundwater. The ISIMIP groundwater sector combines multiple global groundwater models to capture a range of possible outcomes and reduce uncertainty. Initial comparisons reveal significant differences between models in key metrics like water table depth and recharge rates, highlighting the need for structured model intercomparisons.
Tesfalem Abraham, Yan Liu, Sirak Tekleab, and Andreas Hartmann
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2021-271, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2021-271, 2021
Preprint withdrawn
Short summary
Short summary
In this study we demonstrate the use of global data products for the regionalization of model parameters. We combine three steps of uncertainty quantification from the parameter sampling, best parameter sets identification, and spatial cross-validation. Our results show the best validation parameters provide the most robust regionalization results, and the uncertainties from the regionalization in the ungauged catchments are higher than those obtained from simulations in the gauged catchments.
Thomas Fichtner, Yuly Juliana Aguilar Avila, Andreas Hartmann, Stefan Seeger, Martin Maier, and Stephan Raspe
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-4025, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-4025, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Hydrology and Earth System Sciences (HESS).
Short summary
Short summary
The study examines how spatial soil moisture variability influences SVAT model calibration and the estimation of groundwater recharge in forest ecosystems. We show that model-inherent uncertainties affect predictions more strongly than soil moisture variability itself. Our results demonstrate that reliable groundwater recharge can be achieved using data from just six to seven profiles, providing practical guidance for more efficient field monitoring and model calibration.
Theresa Blume, Peter Chifflard, Stefan Achleitner, Andreas Hartmann, Stefan Hergarten, Luisa Hopp, Bernhard Kohl, Florian Leese, Ilja van Meerveld, Christian Reinhardt-Imjela, and Markus Weiler
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-4424, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-4424, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Hydrology and Earth System Sciences (HESS).
Short summary
Short summary
Subsurface stormflow (SSF) is one of the least studied and therefore least understood runoff generation processes because detecting and quantifying SSF is extremely challenging. We present an ongoing concerted experimental effort to systematically investigate SSF across four catchments using a variety of methods covering different spatial scales. Centerpiece of this effort is the construction of 12 large trenches to capture and monitor SSF.
Markus Giese, Yvan Caballero, Andreas Hartmann, and Jean-Baptiste Charlier
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 29, 3037–3054, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-3037-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-3037-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Karst springs respond quickly to environmental changes, making them crucial to understanding climate impacts on groundwater. This study analyses long-term trends in precipitation, temperature, and discharge from more than 50 springs across Europe. Results show that while historical discharge trends align with those of rivers, recent changes are driven by rising temperatures rather than precipitation. These findings highlight climate-driven shifts in groundwater recharge and storage processes.
Pia Ebeling, Andreas Musolff, Rohini Kumar, Andreas Hartmann, and Jan H. Fleckenstein
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 29, 2925–2950, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-2925-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-2925-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Groundwater is a crucial resource at risk due to droughts. To understand drought effects on groundwater levels in Germany, we grouped 6626 wells into six regional and two national patterns. Weather explained half of the level variations with varied response times. Shallow groundwater responds fast and is more vulnerable to short droughts (a few months). Dampened deep heads buffer short droughts but suffer from long droughts and recoveries. Two nationwide trend patterns were linked to human water use.
Robert Reinecke, Annemarie Bäthge, Ricarda Dietrich, Sebastian Gnann, Simon N. Gosling, Danielle Grogan, Andreas Hartmann, Stefan Kollet, Rohini Kumar, Richard Lammers, Sida Liu, Yan Liu, Nils Moosdorf, Bibi Naz, Sara Nazari, Chibuike Orazulike, Yadu Pokhrel, Jacob Schewe, Mikhail Smilovic, Maryna Strokal, Yoshihide Wada, Shan Zuidema, and Inge de Graaf
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1181, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1181, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Here we describe a collaborative effort to improve predictions of how climate change will affect groundwater. The ISIMIP groundwater sector combines multiple global groundwater models to capture a range of possible outcomes and reduce uncertainty. Initial comparisons reveal significant differences between models in key metrics like water table depth and recharge rates, highlighting the need for structured model intercomparisons.
Mariana Gomez, Maximilian Nölscher, Andreas Hartmann, and Stefan Broda
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 4407–4425, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-4407-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-4407-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
To understand the impact of external factors on groundwater level modelling using a 1-D convolutional neural network (CNN) model, we train, validate, and tune individual CNN models for 505 wells distributed across Lower Saxony, Germany. We then evaluate the performance of these models against available geospatial and time series features. This study provides new insights into the relationship between these factors and the accuracy of groundwater modelling.
Guillaume Cinkus, Andreas Wunsch, Naomi Mazzilli, Tanja Liesch, Zhao Chen, Nataša Ravbar, Joanna Doummar, Jaime Fernández-Ortega, Juan Antonio Barberá, Bartolomé Andreo, Nico Goldscheider, and Hervé Jourde
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 27, 1961–1985, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-1961-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-1961-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Numerous modelling approaches can be used for studying karst water resources, which can make it difficult for a stakeholder or researcher to choose the appropriate method. We conduct a comparison of two widely used karst modelling approaches: artificial neural networks (ANNs) and reservoir models. Results show that ANN models are very flexible and seem great for reproducing high flows. Reservoir models can work with relatively short time series and seem to accurately reproduce low flows.
Andreas Hartmann, Jean-Lionel Payeur-Poirier, and Luisa Hopp
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 27, 1325–1341, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-1325-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-1325-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We advance our understanding of including information derived from environmental tracers into hydrological modeling. We present a simple approach that integrates streamflow observations and tracer-derived streamflow contributions for model parameter estimation. We consider multiple observed streamflow components and their variation over time to quantify the impact of their inclusion for streamflow prediction at the catchment scale.
Romane Berthelin, Tunde Olarinoye, Michael Rinderer, Matías Mudarra, Dominic Demand, Mirjam Scheller, and Andreas Hartmann
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 27, 385–400, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-385-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-385-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Karstic recharge processes have mainly been explored using discharge analysis despite the high influence of the heterogeneous surface on hydrological processes. In this paper, we introduce an event-based method which allows for recharge estimation from soil moisture measurements. The method was tested at a karst catchment in Germany but can be applied to other karst areas with precipitation and soil moisture data available. It will allow for a better characterization of karst recharge processes.
Tunde Olarinoye, Tom Gleeson, and Andreas Hartmann
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 5431–5447, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-5431-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-5431-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Analysis of karst spring recession is essential for management of groundwater. In karst, recession is dominated by slow and fast components; separating these components is by manual and subjective approaches. In our study, we tested the applicability of automated streamflow recession extraction procedures for a karst spring. Results showed that, by simple modification, streamflow extraction methods can identify slow and fast components: derived recession parameters are within reasonable ranges.
Yong Chang, Benjamin Mewes, and Andreas Hartmann
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2022-77, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2022-77, 2022
Revised manuscript not accepted
Short summary
Short summary
This study presents a work to investigate the feasibility of using EC to predict the discharge in a typical karst catchment. We found that the spring discharge can be well predicted by EC in storms using LSTM (Long Short Term Memory) model, while the prediction has relatively large uncertainties in small recharge events. To establish a roust LSTM model for long-term discharge prediction from EC in ungauged catchments, the random or fixed-interval discharge monitoring strategy is recommended.
Tom Gleeson, Thorsten Wagener, Petra Döll, Samuel C. Zipper, Charles West, Yoshihide Wada, Richard Taylor, Bridget Scanlon, Rafael Rosolem, Shams Rahman, Nurudeen Oshinlaja, Reed Maxwell, Min-Hui Lo, Hyungjun Kim, Mary Hill, Andreas Hartmann, Graham Fogg, James S. Famiglietti, Agnès Ducharne, Inge de Graaf, Mark Cuthbert, Laura Condon, Etienne Bresciani, and Marc F. P. Bierkens
Geosci. Model Dev., 14, 7545–7571, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-7545-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-7545-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Groundwater is increasingly being included in large-scale (continental to global) land surface and hydrologic simulations. However, it is challenging to evaluate these simulations because groundwater is
hiddenunderground and thus hard to measure. We suggest using multiple complementary strategies to assess the performance of a model (
model evaluation).
Tesfalem Abraham, Yan Liu, Sirak Tekleab, and Andreas Hartmann
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2021-271, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2021-271, 2021
Preprint withdrawn
Short summary
Short summary
In this study we demonstrate the use of global data products for the regionalization of model parameters. We combine three steps of uncertainty quantification from the parameter sampling, best parameter sets identification, and spatial cross-validation. Our results show the best validation parameters provide the most robust regionalization results, and the uncertainties from the regionalization in the ungauged catchments are higher than those obtained from simulations in the gauged catchments.
Cited articles
Addor, N., Newman, A. J., Mizukami, N., and Clark, M. P.: The CAMELS data
set: catchment attributes and meteorology for large-sample studies, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 5293–5313, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-5293-2017, 2017.
Beven, K. J., Smith, P. J., and Freer, J. E.: So just why would a modeller
choose to be incoherent?, J. Hydrol., 354, 15–32,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2008.02.007, 2008.
Freer, J., Beven, K., and Ambroise, B.: Bayesian Estimation of Uncertainty in
Runoff Prediction and the Value of Data: An Application of the GLUE Approach, Water Resour. Res., 32, 2161–2173, https://doi.org/10.1029/95WR03723, 1996.
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.
Hartmann, A., Mudarra, M., Andreo, B., Marín, A., Wagener, T., and Lange, J.: Modeling spatiotemporal impacts of hydroclimatic extremes on groundwater recharge at a Mediterranean karst aquifer, Water Resour. Res., 50, 6507–6521, https://doi.org/10.1002/2014WR015685, 2014.
Hartmann, A., Antonio Barberá, J., and Andreo, B.: On the value of water
quality data and informative flow states in karst modelling, Hydrol. Earth
Syst. Sci., 21, 5971–5985, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-5971-2017, 2017.
Jeannin, P.-Y., Artigue, G., Butscher, C., Chang, Y., Charlier, J.-B., Duran, L., Gill, L., Hartmann, A., Johannet, A., Jourde, H., Kavousi, A., Liesch, T., Liu, Y., Lüthi, M., Malard, A., Mazzilli, N., Pardo-Igúzquiza, E., Thiéry, D., Reimann, T., Schuler, P., Wöhling, T., and Wunsch, A.: Karst modelling challenge 1: Results of hydrological modelling, J. Hydrol., 600, 126508, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2021.126508, 2021.
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, 2019.
Lindström, G., Johansson, B., Persson, M., Gardelin, M., and Bergström, S.: Development and test of the distributed HBV-96
hydrological model, J. Hydrol., 201, 272–288, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(97)00041-3, 1997.
Liu, Y., Zarfl, C., Basu, N. B., and Cirpka, O. A.: Modeling the Fate of
Pharmaceuticals in a Fourth-Order River Under Competing Assumptions of Transient Storage, Water Resour. Res., 56, e2019WR026100, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019WR026100, 2020.
Liu, Y., Wagener, T., and Hartmann, A.: Assessing Streamflow Sensitivity to
Precipitation Variability in Karst-Influenced Catchments With Unclosed Water
Balances, Water Resour. Res., 57, e2020WR028598, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020WR028598, 2021.
Mantovan, P. and Todini, E.: Hydrological forecasting uncertainty assessment: Incoherence of the GLUE methodology, J. Hydrol., 330, 368–381, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2006.04.046, 2006.
McInerney, D., Thyer, M., Kavetski, D., Lerat, J., and Kuczera, G.: Improving
probabilistic prediction of daily streamflow by identifying Pareto optimal
approaches for modeling heteroscedastic residual errors, Water Resour. Res.,
53, 2199–2239, https://doi.org/10.1002/2016WR019168, 2017.
McMillan, H. and Clark, M.: Rainfall-runoff model calibration using informal
likelihood measures within a Markov chain Monte Carlo sampling scheme, Water
Resour. Res., 45, 1–12, https://doi.org/10.1029/2008WR007288, 2009.
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 [data set], https://doi.org/10.5065/D6MW2F4D, 2014.
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.
Pool, S., Vis, M., and Seibert, J.: Evaluating model performance: towards a
non-parametric variant of the Kling–Gupta efficiency, Hydrolog. Sci. J., 63, 1941–1953, https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2018.1552002, 2018.
Smith, T. J. and Marshall, L. A.: Bayesian methods in hydrologic modeling: A
study of recent advancements in Markov chain Monte Carlo techniques, Water
Resour. Res., 44, 1–9, https://doi.org/10.1029/2007wr006705, 2008.
Stedinger, J. R., Vogel, R. M., Lee, S. U., and Batchelder, R.: Appraisal of
the generalized likelihood uncertainty estimation (GLUE) method, Water Resour. Res., 44, 1–17, https://doi.org/10.1029/2008wr006822, 2008.
Vrugt, J. A.: Markov chain Monte Carlo simulation using the DREAM software
package: Theory, concepts, and MATLAB implementation, Environ. Model. Softw., 75, 273–316, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2015.08.013, 2016.
Vrugt, J. A., Gupta, H. V., Bouten, W., and Sorooshian, S.: A Shuffled Complex Evolution Metropolis algorithm for optimization and uncertainty assessment of hydrologic model parameters, Water Resour. Res., 39, 1201, https://doi.org/10.1029/2002WR001642, 2003a.
Vrugt, J. A., Gupta, H. V., Bastidas, L. A., Bouten, W., and Sorooshian, S.:
Effective and efficient algorithm for multiobjective optimization of
hydrologic models, Water Resour. Res., 39, 1–19, https://doi.org/10.1029/2002WR001746, 2003b.
Vrugt, J. A., Ter Braak, C. J. F., Clark, M. P., Hyman, J. M., and Robinson,
B. A.: Treatment of input uncertainty in hydrologic modeling: Doing hydrology backward with Markov chain Monte Carlo simulation, Water Resour. Res., 44, W00B09, https://doi.org/10.1029/2007WR006720, 2008.
Vrugt, J. A., Ter Braak, C. J. F., Diks, C. G. H., Robinson, B. A., Hyman,
J. M., and Higdon, D.: Accelerating Markov chain Monte Carlo simulation by
differential evolution with self-adaptive randomized subspace sampling, Int.
J. Nonlin. Sci. Numer. Simul., 10, 273–290, 2009.
Yang, J., Roberts, G. O., and Rosenthal, J. S.: Optimal scaling of random-walk metropolis algorithms on general target distributions, Stoch.
Process. Appl., 130, 6094–6132, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spa.2020.05.004, 2020.
Yapo, P. O., Gupta, H. V., and Sorooshian, S.: Multi-objective global
optimization for hydrologic models, J. Hydrol., 204, 83–97, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(97)00107-8, 1998.
Short summary
We adapt the informal Kling–Gupta efficiency (KGE) with a gamma distribution to apply it as an informal likelihood function in the DiffeRential Evolution Adaptive Metropolis DREAM(ZS) method. Our adapted approach performs as well as the formal likelihood function for exploring posterior distributions of model parameters. The adapted KGE is superior to the formal likelihood function for calibrations combining multiple observations with different lengths, frequencies and units.
We adapt the informal Kling–Gupta efficiency (KGE) with a gamma distribution to apply it as an...