Articles | Volume 27, issue 9
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-1827-2023
© Author(s) 2023. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.A signal-processing-based interpretation of the Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency
Related authors
Related subject area
Subject: Engineering Hydrology | Techniques and Approaches: Theory development
A pulse-decay method for low (matrix) permeability analyses of granular rock media
Impact of cry wolf effects on social preparedness and the efficiency of flood early warning systems
Impact of detention dams on the probability distribution of floods
Hess Opinions: An interdisciplinary research agenda to explore the unintended consequences of structural flood protection
Managing uncertainty in flood protection planning with climate projections
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 27, 4453–4465,
2023Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 4265–4278,
2022Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 4231–4242,
2021Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 5629–5637,
2018Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 2511–2526,
2018Cited articles
Andersson, J. C. M., Arheimer, B., Traoré, F., Gustafsson, D., and Ali, A.: Process refinements improve a hydrological model concept applied to the Niger River basin, Hydrol. Process., 31, 4540–4554, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.11376, 2017.
ASCE: Criteria for evaluation of watershed models, J. Irrig. Drain. Eng., 119, 429–442, 1993.
Beven, K. J. and Binley, A. M.: The future of distributed models: Model calibration and uncertainty prediction, Hydrol. Process., 6, 279–298, 1992.
Bishop, C. M.: Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning, Springer, New York, ISBN 978-0-387-31073-2, 2006.
Ding, J. Y.: Variable unit hydrograph, J. Hydrol., 22, 53–69, 1974.