Articles | Volume 27, issue 24
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-4529-2023
© Author(s) 2023. 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-27-4529-2023
© Author(s) 2023. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Research article
| 
20 Dec 2023
Research article |
| 20 Dec 2023
| 20 Dec 2023
Comparing quantile regression forest and mixture density long short-term memory models for probabilistic post-processing of satellite precipitation-driven streamflow simulations
Yuhang Zhang
State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
Department of Infrastructure Engineering, The University of Melbourne, Parkville 3010, Australia
State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
Bita Analui
Center for Hydrometeorology and Remote Sensing, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, California, CA 92697, USA
Phu Nguyen
Center for Hydrometeorology and Remote Sensing, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, California, CA 92697, USA
Soroosh Sorooshian
Center for Hydrometeorology and Remote Sensing, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, California, CA 92697, USA
Kuolin Hsu
Center for Hydrometeorology and Remote Sensing, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, California, CA 92697, USA
Yuxuan Wang
College of Arts and Sciences, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22903, USA
Related authors
Yuhang Zhang, Quan J. Wang, Andrew J. Frost, Jayaram Pudashine, Blair Trewin, Carlos Velasco-Forero, Chun-Hsu Su, and Vincent Villani
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-666, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-666, 2026
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Hydrology and Earth System Sciences (HESS).
Short summary
Short summary
This study develops and tests a new system that combines satellite, radar, and rain gauge measurements to produce hourly rainfall maps at 2-kilometre resolution across Australia. The results show clearer and more reliable rainfall patterns than existing operational methods and products. The approach is efficient and supports both real-time monitoring and the reconstruction of historical rainfall. It also provides a practical reference for large-scale rainfall analysis in other regions.
Yuhang Zhang, Quan J. Wang, Andrew J. Frost, Jayaram Pudashine, Blair Trewin, Carlos Velasco-Forero, Chun-Hsu Su, and Vincent Villani
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-666, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-666, 2026
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Hydrology and Earth System Sciences (HESS).
Short summary
Short summary
This study develops and tests a new system that combines satellite, radar, and rain gauge measurements to produce hourly rainfall maps at 2-kilometre resolution across Australia. The results show clearer and more reliable rainfall patterns than existing operational methods and products. The approach is efficient and supports both real-time monitoring and the reconstruction of historical rainfall. It also provides a practical reference for large-scale rainfall analysis in other regions.
Ather Abbas, Yuan Yang, Ming Pan, Yves Tramblay, Chaopeng Shen, Haoyu Ji, Solomon H. Gebrechorkos, Florian Pappenberger, Jong Cheol Pyo, Dapeng Feng, George Huffman, Phu Nguyen, Christian Massari, Luca Brocca, Tan Jackson, and Hylke E. Beck
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-4194, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-4194, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Our study evaluated 23 precipitation datasets using a hydrological model at global scale to assess their suitability and accuracy. We found that MSWEP V2.8 excels due to its ability to integrate data from multiple sources, while others, such as IMERG and JRA-3Q, demonstrated strong regional performances. This research assists in selecting the appropriate dataset for applications in water resource management, hazard assessment, agriculture, and environmental monitoring.
Song Wang, Carlos Sierra, Yiqi Luo, Jinsong Wang, Weinan Chen, Yahai Zhang, Aizhong Ye, and Shuli Niu
Biogeosciences Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-2023-33, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-2023-33, 2023
Manuscript not accepted for further review
Short summary
Short summary
Nitrogen is important for plant growth and carbon uptake, which is uaually limited in nature and can constrain carbon storage and impact efforts to combat climate change. We developed a new method of combining data and models to determine if and how much an ecosystem is nitrogen limited. This new method can help determine if and to what extent an ecosystem is nitrogen-limited, providing insight into nutrient limitations on a global scale and guiding ecosystem management decisions.
Miguel Ricardo A. Hilario, Ewan Crosbie, Michael Shook, Jeffrey S. Reid, Maria Obiminda L. Cambaliza, James Bernard B. Simpas, Luke Ziemba, Joshua P. DiGangi, Glenn S. Diskin, Phu Nguyen, F. Joseph Turk, Edward Winstead, Claire E. Robinson, Jian Wang, Jiaoshi Zhang, Yang Wang, Subin Yoon, James Flynn, Sergio L. Alvarez, Ali Behrangi, and Armin Sorooshian
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 3777–3802, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-3777-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-3777-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This study characterizes long-range transport from major Asian pollution sources into the tropical northwest Pacific and the impact of scavenging on these air masses. We combined aircraft observations, HYSPLIT trajectories, reanalysis, and satellite retrievals to reveal distinct composition and size distribution profiles associated with specific emission sources and wet scavenging. The results of this work have implications for international policymaking related to climate and health.
Cited articles
Althoff, D., Rodrigues, L. N., and Bazame, H. C.: Uncertainty quantification for hydrological models based on neural networks: the dropout ensemble, Stoch. Env. Res. Risk A., 35, 1051-1067, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-021-01980-8, 2021.
Bellier, J., Zin, I., and Bontron, G.: Generating coherent ensemble forecasts after hydrological postprocessing: Adaptations of ECC-based methods, Water Resour. Res., 54, 5741–5762, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018WR022601, 2018.
Beven, K.: Changing ideas in hydrology – the case of physically-based models, J. Hydrol., 105, 157–172, https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1694(90)90161-P, 1989.
Bogner, K. and Pappenberger, F.: Multiscale error analysis, correction, and predictive uncertainty estimation in a flood forecasting system, Water Resour. Res., 47, e2010WR009137, https://doi.org/10.1029/2010WR009137, 2011.
Bormann, K. J., Evans, J. P., and McCabe, M. F.: Constraining snowmelt in a temperature-index model using simulated snow densities, J. Hydrol., 517, 652–667, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.05.073, 2014.
Bröcker, J.: Evaluating raw ensembles with the continuous ranked probability score, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 138, 1611–1617, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.1891, 2012.
Brunner, M. I., Hingray, B., Zappa, M., and Favre, A. C.: Future trends in the interdependence between flood peaks and volumes: Hydro-climatological drivers and uncertainty, Water Resour. Res., 55, 4745–4759, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019WR024701, 2019.
Chawanda, C. J., George, C., Thiery, W., Griensven, A. V., Tech, J., Arnold, J., and Srinivasan, R.: User-friendly workflows for catchment modelling: Towards reproducible SWAT+ model studies, Environ. Modell. Softw., 134, 104812, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2020.104812, 2020.
Chen, H., Yong, B., Shen, Y., Liu, J., Hong, Y., and Zhang, J.: Comparison analysis of six purely satellite-derived global precipitation estimates, J. Hydrol., 581, 124376, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2019.124376, 2020.
Chinese Academy of Sciences Computer Network Information Center (CAS-CNIC): The National Aeronautics and Space Administration Shuttle Radar Topographic Mission (NASA SRTM): Digital elevation model data republication, GSCLOUD [data set], http://www.gscloud.cn, last access: 18 December 2023.
Chinese Academy of Sciences Resource and Environmental Science Data Center (CAS-RESDC): Landuse dataset in China (1980–2015), National Tibetan Plateau/Third Pole Environment Data Center [data set], http://data.tpdc.ac.cn/en/data/a75843b4-6591-4a69-a5e4-6f94099ddc2d (last access: 18 December 2023), 2019.
Clark, M. P., Nijssen, B., Lundquist, J. D., Kavetski, D., Rupp, D. E., Woods, R. A., Freer, J. E., Gutmann, E. D., Wood, A. W., Brekke, L. D., Arnold, J. R., Gochis, D. J., and Rasmussen, R. M.: A unified approach for process-based hydrologic modelling: 1. Modelling concept, Water Resour. Res., 51, 2498–2514, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015WR017198, 2015.
Corzo Perez, G. A., van Huijgevoort, M. H. J., Voß, F., and van Lanen, H. A. J.: On the spatio-temporal analysis of hydrological droughts from global hydrological models, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 15, 2963–2978, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-15-2963-2011, 2011.
Cunha, L. K., Mandapaka, P. V., Krajewski, W. F., Mantilla, R., and Bradley, A. A.: Impact of radar-rainfall error structure on estimated flood magnitude across scales: An investigation based on a parsimonious distributed hydrological model, Water Resour. Res., 48, W10515, https://doi.org/10.1029/2012WR012138, 2012.
Dembélé, M., Hrachowitz, M., Savenije, H. H. G., Mariéthoz, G., and Schaefli, B.: Improving the Predictive Skill of a Distributed Hydrological Model by Calibration on Spatial Patterns With Multiple Satellite Data Sets, Water Resour. Res., 56, e2019WR026085, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019WR026085, 2020.
Dong, J., Crow, W. T., and Reichle, R.: Improving Rain/No-Rain Detection Skill by Merging Precipitation Estimates from Different Sources, J. Hydrometeorol., 21, 2419–2429, https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-20-0097.1, 2020.
Du, C., Ye, A., Gan, Y., You, J., Duan, Q., Ma, F., and Hou, J.: Drainage network extraction from a high-resolution DEM using parallel programming in the .NET Framework, J. Hydrol., 555, 506–517, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.10.034, 2017.
Evin, G., Lafaysse, M., Taillardat, M., and Zamo, M.: Calibrated ensemble forecasts of the height of new snow using quantile regression forests and ensemble model output statistics, Nonlin. Processes Geophys., 28, 467–480, https://doi.org/10.5194/npg-28-467-2021, 2021.
Falck, A. S., Maggioni, V., Tomasella, J., Vila, D. A., and Diniz, F. L. R.: Propagation of satellite precipitation uncertainties through a distributed hydrologic model: A case study in the Tocantins–Araguaia basin in Brazil, J. Hydrol., 527, 943–957, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.05.042, 2015.
Fang, K., Kifer, D., Lawson, K., Feng, D., and Shen, C.: The data synergy effects of time-series deep learning models in hydrology, Water Resour. Res., 58, e2021WR029583, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021WR029583, 2022.
Fischer, G., Nachtergaele, F., Prieler, S., van Velthuizen, H. T., Verelst, L., and Wiberg, D.: Global Agroecological Zones Assessment for Agriculture (GAEZ 2008), IIASA, Laxenburg, Austria and FAO, Rome, Italy, [data set], http://www.fao.org/soils-portal/soil-survey/soil-maps-and-databases/harmonized-world-soil-database-v12/en/ (last access: 18 December 2023), 2008.
Frame, J. M., Kratzert, F., Raney, A., Rahman, M., Salas, F. R., and Nearing, G. S.: Post-Processing the National Water Model with Long Short-Term Memory Networks for Streamflow Predictions and Model Diagnostics, J. Am. Water Resour. As., 57, 885–905, https://doi.org/10.1111/1752-1688.12964, 2021.
Ghiggi, G., Humphrey, V., Seneviratne, S. I., and Gudmundsson, L.: G-RUN ENSEMBLE: A Multi-Forcing Observation-Based Global Runoff Reanalysis, Water Resour. Res., 57, e2020WR028787, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020WR028787, 2021.
Gneiting, T. and Ranjan, R.: Comparing density forecasts using threshold-and quantile-weighted scoring rules, J. Bus. Econ. Stat., 29, 411–422, https://doi.org/10.1198/jbes.2010.08110, 2011.
Gneiting, T., Balabdaoui, F., and Raftery, A. E.: Probabilistic forecasts, calibration and sharpness, J. Roy. Stat. Soc. B, 69, 243–268, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9868.2007.00587.x, 2007.
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.
Gou, J., Miao, C., Duan, Q., Tang, Q., Di, Z., Liao, W., Wu, J., and Zhou, R.: Sensitivity Analysis-Based Automatic Parameter Calibration of the VIC Model for Streamflow Simulations Over China, Water Resour. Res., 56, e2019WR025968, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019WR025968, 2020.
Gou, J., Miao, C., Samaniego, L., Xiao, M., Wu, J., and Guo, X.: CNRD v1.0: A High-Quality Natural Runoff Dataset for Hydrological and Climate Studies in China, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 102, E929–E947, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-20-0094.1, 2021.
Herrera, P. A., Marazuela, M. A., and Hofmann, T.: Parameter estimation and uncertainty analysis in hydrological modelling, Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews-Water, 9, e1569, https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1569, 2022.
Honti, M., Scheidegger, A., and Stamm, C.: The importance of hydrological uncertainty assessment methods in climate change impact studies, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 3301–3317, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-18-3301-2014, 2014.
Hou, A. Y., Kakar, R. K., Neeck, S., AA, A., Kummerow, C. D., Kojima, M., Oki, R., Nakamura, K., and Iguchi, T.: The Global Precipitation Measurement Mission, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 95, 701–722, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-13-00164.1, 2013.
Huffman, G. J., Stocker, E. F., Bolvin, D. T., Nelkin, E. J., and Tan, J.: GPM IMERG Final Precipitation L3 1 day 0.1 degree x 0.1 degree V06, Goddard Earth Sciences Data and Information Services Center (GES DISC), Greenbelt, MD [data set], https://doi.org/10.5067/GPM/IMERGDF/DAY/06, 2019.
Huffman, G. J., Bolvin, D. T., Nelkin, E. J., and Tan, J.: Integrated Multi-satellitE Retrievals for GPM (IMERG) technical documentation, https://gpm.nasa.gov/resources/documents/IMERG-V06-Technical-Documentation (last access: 18 December 2023), 2020.
Jajarmizadeh, M., Harun, S., and Salarpour, M.: A review on theoretical consideration and types of models in hydrology, Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 5, 249–261, https://doi.org/10.3923/jest.2012.249.261, 2012.
Jiang, L. and Bauer-Gottwein, P.: How do GPM IMERG precipitation estimates perform as hydrological model forcing? Evaluation for 300 catchments across Mainland China, J. Hydrol., 572, 486–500, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2019.03.042, 2019.
Jiang, S., Zheng, Y., Wang, C., and Babovic, V.: Uncovering Flooding Mechanisms Across the Contiguous United States Through Interpretive Deep Learning on Representative Catchments, Water Resour. Res., 58, e2021WR030185, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021WR030185, 2022.
Jnelson18: jnelson18/pyquantrf: DOI release (v0.0.3doi), Zenodo [code], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5815105, 2022.
Jolliffe, I. T. and Stephenson, D. B.: Forecast verification: a practitioner's guide in atmospheric science, John Wiley & Sons, https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119960003, 2012.
Kasraei, B., Heung, B., Saurette, D. D., Schmidt, M. G., Bulmer, C. E., and Bethel, W.: Quantile regression as a generic approach for estimating uncertainty of digital soil maps produced from machine-learning, Environ. Modell. Softw., 144, 105139, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2021.105139, 2021.
Khakbaz, B., Imam, B., Hsu, K., and Sorooshian, S.: From lumped to distributed via semi-distributed: Calibration strategies for semi-distributed hydrologic models, J. Hydrol., 418, 61–77, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.02.021, 2012.
Kling, H., Fuchs, M., and Paulin, M.: Runoff conditions in the upper Danube basin under an ensemble of climate change scenarios, J. Hydrol., 424, 264–277, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.01.011, 2012.
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.
Kobold, M. and Sušelj, K.: Precipitation forecasts and their uncertainty as input into hydrological models, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 9, 322–332, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-9-322-2005, 2005.
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.
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, 2019.
Kratzert, F., Klotz, D., Hochreiter, S., and Nearing, G. S.: A note on leveraging synergy in multiple meteorological data sets with deep learning for rainfall–runoff modeling, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 2685–2703, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-2685-2021, 2021.
Kratzert, F., Gauch, M., Nearing, G., and Klotz, D.: NeuralHydrology – A Python library for Deep Learning research in hydrology, Journal of Open Source Software, 7, 4050, https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.04050, 2022a.
Kratzert, F., Gauch, M., Nearing, G., and Klotz, D.: NeuralHydrology – A Python library for Deep Learning research in hydrology (v.1.2.3), Zenodo [code], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6326394, 2022b.
Kratzert, F., Nearing, G., Addor, N., Erickson, T., Gauch, M., Gilon, O., Gudmundsson, L., Hassidim, A., Klotz, D., and Nevo, S.: Caravan – A global community dataset for large-sample hydrology, Sci. Data, 10, 61, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-023-01975-w, 2023.
Kubota, T., Shige, S., Hashizume, H., Aonashi, K., Takahashi, N., Seto, S., Hirose, M., Takayabu, Y. N., Ushio, T., and Nakagawa, K.: Global precipitation map using satellite-borne microwave radiometers by the GSMaP project: Production and validation, IEEE T. Geosci. Remote, 45, 2259–2275, https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2007.895337, 2007.
Kubota, T., Aonashi, K., Ushio, T., Shige, S., Takayabu, Y. N., Kachi, M., Arai, Y., Tashima, T., Masaki, T., and Kawamoto, N.: Global Satellite Mapping of Precipitation (GSMaP) products in the GPM era, Satellite Precipitation Measurement, 1, 355–373, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-24568-9_20, 2020.
Kubota, T., Aonashi, K., Ushio, T., Shige, S., Takayabu, Y. N., Kachi, M., Arai, Y., Tashima, T., Masaki, T., and Kawamoto, N.: Global Satellite Mapping of Precipitation (GSMaP) products, JAXA Global Rainfall Watch [data set], https://sharaku.eorc.jaxa.jp/GSMaP/index.htm (last access: 18 December 2023), 2023.
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.
Li, A. H. and Martin, A.: Forest-type regression with general losses and robust forest, Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Machine Learning, 70, 2091–2100, 2017.
Li, D., Marshall, L., Liang, Z., and Sharma, A.: Hydrologic multi-model ensemble predictions using variational Bayesian deep learning, J. Hydrol., 604, 127221, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2021.127221, 2022.
Li, M., Wang, Q. J., Bennett, J. C., and Robertson, D. E.: A strategy to overcome adverse effects of autoregressive updating of streamflow forecasts, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 19, 1–15, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-19-1-2015, 2015.
Li, M., Wang, Q. J., Bennett, J. C., and Robertson, D. E.: Error reduction and representation in stages (ERRIS) in hydrological modelling for ensemble streamflow forecasting, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 20, 3561–3579, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-20-3561-2016, 2016.
Li, W., Duan, Q., Miao, C., Ye, A., Gong, W., and Di, Z.: A review on statistical postprocessing methods for hydrometeorological ensemble forecasting, Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Water, 4, e1246, https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1246, 2017.
Mai, J., Craig, J. R., Tolson, B. A., and Arsenault, R.: The sensitivity of simulated streamflow to individual hydrologic processes across North America, Nat. Commun., 13, 455, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-28010-7, 2022a.
Mai, J., Shen, H., Tolson, B. A., Gaborit, É., Arsenault, R., Craig, J. R., Fortin, V., Fry, L. M., Gauch, M., Klotz, D., Kratzert, F., O'Brien, N., Princz, D. G., Rasiya Koya, S., 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: the Great Lakes (GRIP-GL), Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 3537–3572, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-3537-2022, 2022b.
Meinshausen, N. and Ridgeway, G.: Quantile regression forests, J. Mach. Learn. Res., 7, 983–999, https://www.jmlr.org/papers/volume7/meinshausen06a/meinshausen06a.pdf (last access: 18 December 2023), 2006.
Miao, C., Gou, J., Fu, B., Tang, Q., Duan, Q., Chen, Z., Lei, H., Chen, J., Guo, J., and Borthwick, A. G.: High-quality reconstruction of China's natural streamflow, Sci. Bull., 67, 547–556, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scib.2021.09.022, 2022.
Nash, J. E. and Sutcliffe, J. V.: River flow forecasting through conceptual models part I – A discussion of principles, J. Hydrol., 10, 282–290, https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1694(70)90255-6, 1970.
Nasreen, S., Součková, M., Vargas Godoy, M. R., Singh, U., Markonis, Y., Kumar, R., Rakovec, O., and Hanel, M.: A 500-year annual runoff reconstruction for 14 selected European catchments, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 14, 4035–4056, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-14-4035-2022, 2022.
Nearing, G. S., Tian, Y., Gupta, H. V., Clark, M. P., Harrison, K. W., and Weijs, S. V.: A philosophical basis for hydrological uncertainty, Hydrolog. Sci. J., 61, 1666–1678, https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2016.1183009, 2016.
Nguyen, P., Ombadi, M., Gorooh, V. A., Shearer, E. J., Sadeghi, M., Sorooshian, S., Hsu, K., Bolvin, D., and Ralph, M. F.: PERSIANN Dynamic Infrared–Rain Rate (PDIR-Now): A Near-Real-Time, Quasi-Global Satellite Precipitation Dataset, J. Hydrometeorol., 21, 2893–2906, https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-20-0177.1, 2020a.
Nguyen, P., Shearer, E. J., Ombadi, M., Gorooh, V. A., Hsu, K., Sorooshian, S., Logan, W. S., and Ralph, M.: PERSIANN Dynamic Infrared–Rain Rate Model (PDIR) for High-Resolution, Real-Time Satellite Precipitation Estimation, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 101, E286–E302, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-19-0118.1, 2020b.
Nguyen, P., Shearer, E. J., Tran, H., Ombadi, M., Hayatbini, N., Palacios, T., Huynh, P., Updegraff, G., Hsu, K., Kuligowski, B., Logan, W. S., and Sorooshian, S.: The CHRS Data Portal, an easily accessible public repository for PERSIANN global satellite precipitation data, Scientific Data, 6, 180296, https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2018.296, 2019 (data available at: http://chrsdata.eng.uci.edu/, last access: 19 December 2023).
Pan, B., Anderson, G. J., Goncalves, A., Lucas, D. D., Bonfils, C. J., Lee, J., Tian, Y., and Ma, H. Y.: Learning to correct climate projection biases, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 13, e2021MS002509, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021MS002509, 2021.
Parodi, M. U., Giardino, A., van Dongeren, A., Pearson, S. G., Bricker, J. D., and Reniers, A. J. H. M.: Uncertainties in coastal flood risk assessments in small island developing states, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 20, 2397–2414, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-20-2397-2020, 2020.
Razavi, S.: Deep learning, explained: Fundamentals, explainability, and bridgeability to process-based modelling, Environ. Modell. Softw., 144, 105159, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2021.105159, 2021.
Schaake, J. C., Hamill, T. M., Buizza, R., and Clark, M.: HEPEX: the hydrological ensemble prediction experiment, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 88, 1541–1548, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-88-10-1541, 2007.
Shen, C. and Lawson, K.: Applications of deep learning in hydrology, Deep Learning for the Earth Sciences: A Comprehensive Approach to Remote Sensing, Climate Science, and Geosciences, edited by: Camps-Valls, G., Tuia, D., Zhu, X., and Reichstein, M., John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 283–297, https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119646181.ch19, 2021.
Shen, Y., Ruijsch, J., Lu, M., Sutanudjaja, E. H., and Karssenberg, D.: Random forests-based error-correction of streamflow from a large-scale hydrological model: Using model state variables to estimate error terms, Comput. Geosci., 159, 105019, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2021.105019, 2022.
Shen, Z., Yong, B., Gourley, J. J., and Qi, W.: Real-time bias adjustment for satellite-based precipitation estimates over Mainland China, J. Hydrol., 596, 126133, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2021.126133, 2021.
Sit, M., Demiray, B. Z., Xiang, Z., Ewing, G. J., Sermet, Y., and Demir, I.: A comprehensive review of deep learning applications in hydrology and water resources, Water Sci. Technol., 82, 2635–2670, https://doi.org/10.2166/wst.2020.369, 2020.
Sittner, W. T., Schauss, C. E., and Monro, J. C.: Continuous hydrograph synthesis with an API-type hydrologic model, Water Resour. Res., 5, 1007–1022, https://doi.org/10.1029/WR005i005p01007, 1969.
Sivapalan, M.: From engineering hydrology to Earth system science: milestones in the transformation of hydrologic science, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 1665–1693, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-1665-2018, 2018.
Sordo-Ward, Á., Granados, I., Martín-Carrasco, F., and Garrote, L.: Impact of Hydrological Uncertainty on Water Management Decisions, Water Resour. Manag., 30, 5535–5551, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-016-1505-5, 2016.
Sun, Q., Miao, C., Duan, Q., Ashouri, H., Sorooshian, S., and Hsu, K. L.: A Review of Global Precipitation Data Sets: Data Sources, Estimation, and Intercomparisons, Rev. Geophys., 56, 79–107, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017RG000574, 2018.
Taillardat, M., Mestre, O., Zamo, M., and Naveau, P.: Calibrated Ensemble Forecasts Using Quantile Regression Forests and Ensemble Model Output Statistics, Mon. Weather Rev., 144, 2375–2393, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-15-0260.1, 2016.
Taillardat, M., Fougères, A., Naveau, P., and Mestre, O.: Forest-Based and Semiparametric Methods for the Postprocessing of Rainfall Ensemble Forecasting, Weather Forecast., 34, 617–634, https://dio.org/10.1175/WAF-D-18-0149.1, 2019.
Tan, M. L., Gassman, P. W., Yang, X., and Haywood, J.: A review of SWAT applications, performance and future needs for simulation of hydro-climatic extremes, Adv. Water Resour., 143, 103662, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2020.103662, 2020.
Tian, Y., Peters-Lidard, C. D., Eylander, J. B., Joyce, R. J., Huffman, G. J., Adler, R. F., Hsu, K., Turk, F. J., Garcia, M., and Zeng, J.: Component analysis of errors in satellite-based precipitation estimates, J. Geophys. Res., 114, D24101, https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JD011949, 2009.
Troin, M., Arsenault, R., Wood, A. W., Brissette, F., and Martel, J. L.: Generating Ensemble Streamflow Forecasts: A Review of Methods and Approaches Over the Past 40 Years, Water Resour. Res., 57, e2020WR028392, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020WR028392, 2021.
Tsai, W., Feng, D., Pan, M., Beck, H., Lawson, K., Yang, Y., Liu, J., and Shen, C.: From calibration to parameter learning: Harnessing the scaling effects of big data in geoscientific modelling, Nat. Commun., 12, 1–13, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-26107-z, 2021.
Tyralis, H. and Papacharalampous, G.: Quantile-based hydrological modelling, Water, 13, 3420, https://doi.org/10.3390/w13233420, 2021.
Tyralis, H., Papacharalampous, G., Burnetas, A., and Langousis, A.: Hydrological post-processing using stacked generalization of quantile regression algorithms: Large-scale application over CONUS, J. Hydrol., 577, 123957, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2019.123957, 2019.
Wang, Q. J., Robertson, D. E., and Chiew, F. H. S.: A Bayesian joint probability modelling approach for seasonal forecasting of streamflows at multiple sites, Water Resour. Res., 45, W05407, https://doi.org/10.1029/2008WR007355, 2009.
Wu, J., Yen, H., Arnold, J. G., Yang, Y. C. E., Cai, X., White, M. J., Santhi, C., Miao, C., and Srinivasan, R.: Development of reservoir operation functions in SWAT+ for national environmental assessments, J. Hydrol., 583, 124556, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2020.124556, 2020.
Xia, J.: Identification of a constrained nonlinear hydrological system described by Volterra Functional Series, Water Resour. Res., 27, 2415–2420, https://doi.org/10.1029/91WR01364, 1991.
Xia, J., Wang, G., Tan, G., Ye, A., and Huang, G. H.: Development of distributed time-variant gain model for nonlinear hydrological systems, Sci. China Ser. D, 48, 713–723, https://doi.org/10.1360/03yd0183, 2005.
Xu, L., Chen, N., Moradkhani, H., Zhang, X., and Hu, C.: Improving Global Monthly and Daily Precipitation Estimation by Fusing Gauge Observations, Remote Sensing, and Reanalysis Data Sets, Water Resour. Res., 56, e2019WR026444, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019WR026444, 2020.
Yang, Q., Wang, Q. J., and Hakala, K.: Achieving effective calibration of precipitation forecasts over a continental scale, J. Hydrol., 35, 100818, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrh.2021.100818, 2021.
Ye, A., Duan, Q., Zeng, H., Li, L., and Wang, C.: A distributed time-variant gain hydrological model based on remote sensing, Journal of Resources and Ecology, 1, 222–230, https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1674-764x.2010.03.005, 2010.
Ye, A., Duan, Q., Zhan, C., Liu, Z., and Mao, Y.: Improving kinematic wave routing scheme in Community Land Model, Hydrol. Res., 44, 886–903, https://doi.org/10.2166/nh.2012.145, 2013.
Ye, A., Duan, Q., Yuan, X., Wood, E. F., and Schaake, J.: Hydrologic post-processing of MOPEX streamflow simulations, J. Hydrol., 508, 147–156, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2013.10.055, 2014.
Ye, A., Duan, Q., Schaake, J., Xu, J., Deng, X., Di, Z., Miao, C., and Gong, W.: Post-processing of ensemble forecasts in low-flow period, Hydrol. Process., 29, 2438–2453, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.10374, 2015.
Yilmaz, K. K., Gupta, H. V., and Wagener, T.: A process-based diagnostic approach to model evaluation: Application to the NWS distributed hydrologic model, Water Resour. Res., 44, W09417, https://doi.org/10.1029/2007WR006716, 2008.
Zhang, Y. and Ye, A.: Machine Learning for Precipitation Forecasts Postprocessing: Multimodel Comparison and Experimental Investigation, J. Hydrometeorol., 22, 3065–3085, https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-21-0096.1, 2021.
Zhang, Y., Ye, A., Nguyen, P., Analui, B., Sorooshian, S., and Hsu, K.: New insights into error decomposition for precipitation products, Geophys. Res. Lett., 48, e2021GL094092, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021GL094092, 2021a.
Zhang, Y., Ye, A., Nguyen, P., Analui, B., Sorooshian, S., and Hsu, K.: Error Characteristics and Scale Dependence of Current Satellite Precipitation Estimates Products in Hydrological Modelling, Remote Sensing, 13, 3061, https://doi.org/10.3390/rs13163061, 2021b.
Zhang, Y., Ye, A., Nguyen, P., Analui, B., Sorooshian, S., and Hsu, K.: QRF4P-NRT Probabilistic Post-processing of Near-real-time Satellite Precipitation Estimates using Quantile Regression Forests, Water Resour. Res., 58, e2022WR032117, https://doi.org/10.1029/2022WR032117, 2022a.
Zhang, Y., Ye, A., Nguyen, P., Analui, B., Sorooshian, S., and Hsu, K.: Dataset and results for “Comparing machine learning and deep learning models for probabilistic post-processing of satellite precipitation-driven streamflow simulation”, Zenodo [data set], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7187505, 2022b.
Zhao, L., Duan, Q., Schaake, J., Ye, A., and Xia, J.: A hydrologic post-processor for ensemble streamflow predictions, Adv. Geosci., 29, 51–59, https://doi.org/10.5194/adgeo-29-51-2011, 2011.
Zhou, X., Polcher, J., and Dumas, P.: Representing Human Water Management in a Land Surface Model Using a Supply/Demand Approach, Water Resour. Res., 57, e2020WR028133, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020WR028133, 2021.
Zhu, S., Luo, X., Yuan, X., and Xu, Z.: An improved long short-term memory network for streamflow forecasting in the upper Yangtze River, Stoch. Env. Res. Risk A., 34, 1313–1329, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-020-01766-4, 2020.
Zounemat-Kermani, M., Batelaan, O., Fadaee, M., and Hinkelmann, R: Ensemble machine learning paradigms in hydrology: A review, J. Hydrol., 598, 126266, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2021.126266, 2021.
Short summary
Our study shows that while the quantile regression forest (QRF) and countable mixtures of asymmetric Laplacians long short-term memory (CMAL-LSTM) models demonstrate similar proficiency in multipoint probabilistic predictions, QRF excels in smaller watersheds and CMAL-LSTM in larger ones. CMAL-LSTM performs better in single-point deterministic predictions, whereas QRF model is more efficient overall.
Our study shows that while the quantile regression forest (QRF) and countable mixtures of...
