Articles | Volume 29, issue 19
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-5005-2025
© Author(s) 2025. 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-29-5005-2025
© Author(s) 2025. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Research article
| 
08 Oct 2025
Research article |
| 08 Oct 2025
| 08 Oct 2025
How well do process-based and data-driven hydrological models learn from limited discharge data?
Maria Staudinger
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Department of Geography, University of Zurich, Winterthurerstrasse 190, 8057 Zurich, Switzerland
Anna Herzog
Department of Hydrology and Climatology, Institute of Environmental Science and Geography, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany
Ralf Loritz
Institute of Water and Environment, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Karlsruhe, Germany
Tobias Houska
Department of Landscape Ecology and Resources Management, University of Gießen, Gießen, Germany
Sandra Pool
Department Water Resources and Drinking Water, Eawag – Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology, Dübendorf, Switzerland
Diana Spieler
Department of Hydrosciences, Institute of Hydrology and Meteorology, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany
now at: Schulich School of Engineering, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada
Paul D. Wagner
Department of Hydrology and Water Resources Management, Institute for Natural Resource Conservation, Kiel University, Kiel, Germany
Juliane Mai
Earth and Environmental Science, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
Jens Kiesel
Department of Hydrology and Water Resources Management, Institute for Natural Resource Conservation, Kiel University, Kiel, Germany
Stone Environmental, 535 Stone Cutters Way, 05602 Montpelier, VT, USA
Stephan Thober
Computational Hydrosystems, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research – UFZ, Leipzig, Germany
Björn Guse
Department of Hydrology and Water Resources Management, Institute for Natural Resource Conservation, Kiel University, Kiel, Germany
German Research Centre for Geosciences, Section Hydrology, Potsdam, Germany
Uwe Ehret
Institute of Water and Environment, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Karlsruhe, Germany
Related authors
Daniel Viviroli, Martin Jury, Maria Staudinger, Martina Kauzlaric, Heimo Truhez, and Douglas Maraun
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1920, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1920, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences (NHESS).
Short summary
Short summary
Estimating the frequency and magnitude of floods is challenging due to the limited length of streamflow records. Here, we explore whether an extensive archive of meteorological forecasts run over past dates can assist in this context. After processing and concatenating these data for use as input to a hydrological model, we derive flood statistics from simulated streamflow. Results are promising for the larger catchments studied, providing a valuable complementary perspective on rare floods.
Maria Staudinger, Martina Kauzlaric, Alexandre Mas, Guillaume Evin, Benoit Hingray, and Daniel Viviroli
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 247–265, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-25-247-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-25-247-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Various combinations of antecedent conditions and precipitation result in floods of varying degrees. Antecedent conditions played a crucial role in generating even large ones. The key predictors and spatial patterns of antecedent conditions leading to flooding at the basin's outlet were distinct. Precipitation and soil moisture from almost all sub-catchments were important for more frequent floods. For rarer events, only the predictors of specific sub-catchments were important.
Daniel Viviroli, Anna E. Sikorska-Senoner, Guillaume Evin, Maria Staudinger, Martina Kauzlaric, Jérémy Chardon, Anne-Catherine Favre, Benoit Hingray, Gilles Nicolet, Damien Raynaud, Jan Seibert, Rolf Weingartner, and Calvin Whealton
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 2891–2920, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-22-2891-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-22-2891-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Estimating the magnitude of rare to very rare floods is a challenging task due to a lack of sufficiently long observations. The challenge is even greater in large river basins, where precipitation patterns and amounts differ considerably between individual events and floods from different parts of the basin coincide. We show that a hydrometeorological model chain can provide plausible estimates in this setting and can thus inform flood risk and safety assessments for critical infrastructure.
Maria Staudinger, Stefan Seeger, Barbara Herbstritt, Michael Stoelzle, Jan Seibert, Kerstin Stahl, and Markus Weiler
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 12, 3057–3066, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-3057-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-3057-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
The data set CH-IRP provides isotope composition in precipitation and streamflow from 23 Swiss catchments, being unique regarding its long-term multi-catchment coverage along an alpine–pre-alpine gradient. CH-IRP contains fortnightly time series of stable water isotopes from streamflow grab samples complemented by time series in precipitation. Sampling conditions, catchment and climate information, lab standards and errors are provided together with areal precipitation and catchment boundaries.
Andrea L. Campoverde, Uwe Ehret, Patrick Ludwig, and Joaquim G. Pinto
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3988, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3988, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences (NHESS).
Short summary
Short summary
Droughts are becoming more common in Europe. Our study used vast climate data to uncover extreme unseen low-water events. These simulations show the potential droughts becoming more severe and lasting longer than the damaging 2018 event, which impacted shipping and industry. This research highlights the urgent need for adaptation measures to prevent costly economic and ecological consequences for the Rhine's waterway.
Katherine Grayson, Stephan Thober, Aleksander Lacima-Nadolnik, Ivan Alsina-Ferrer, Llorenç Lledó, Ehsan Sharifi, and Francisco Doblas-Reyes
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 5873–5890, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-5873-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-5873-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We present One_Pass (v0.8.0), a Python package enabling computation of statistics from streamed global climate model output using one-pass algorithms. Users often need statistics covering periods longer than the stream duration, requiring algorithms that do not store full time series. One-pass methods address this need while avoiding full data archiving, offering memory-efficient, accurate results for high-performance computing (HPC) workflows and downstream applications like bias adjustment.
Paul Daniel Wagner, Fatemeh Saba, Pedro Achanccaray, and Nicola Fohrer
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3091, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3091, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Hydrology and Earth System Sciences (HESS).
Short summary
Short summary
Recent drought conditions in Europe led to significant land use and land cover changes that affect the water balance. In the study area of the Harz mountains we found increasing areas of dead coniferous trees. The loss of trees potentially exacerbates floods and droughts. Therefore, afforestation with climate-resilient trees is needed to improve both flood and drought resilience in the future.
Francisco J. Doblas-Reyes, Jenni Kontkanen, Irina Sandu, Mario Acosta, Mohammed Hussam Al Turjmam, Ivan Alsina-Ferrer, Miguel Andrés-Martínez, Leo Arriola, Marvin Axness, Marc Batlle Martín, Peter Bauer, Tobias Becker, Daniel Beltrán, Sebastian Beyer, Hendryk Bockelmann, Pierre-Antoine Bretonnière, Sebastien Cabaniols, Silvia Caprioli, Miguel Castrillo, Aparna Chandrasekar, Suvarchal Cheedela, Victor Correal, Emanuele Danovaro, Paolo Davini, Jussi Enkovaara, Claudia Frauen, Barbara Früh, Aina Gaya Àvila, Paolo Ghinassi, Rohit Ghosh, Supriyo Ghosh, Iker González, Katherine Grayson, Matthew Griffith, Ioan Hadade, Christopher Haine, Carl Hartick, Utz-Uwe Haus, Shane Hearne, Heikki Järvinen, Bernat Jiménez, Amal John, Marlin Juchem, Thomas Jung, Jessica Kegel, Matthias Kelbling, Kai Keller, Bruno Kinoshita, Theresa Kiszler, Daniel Klocke, Lukas Kluft, Nikolay Koldunov, Tobias Kölling, Joonas Kolstela, Luis Kornblueh, Sergey Kosukhin, Aleksander Lacima-Nadolnik, Jeisson Javier Leal Rojas, Jonni Lehtiranta, Tuomas Lunttila, Anna Luoma, Pekka Manninen, Alexey Medvedev, Sebastian Milinski, Ali Omar Abdelazim Mohammed, Sebastian Müller, Devaraju Naryanappa, Natalia Nazarova, Sami Niemelä, Bimochan Niraula, Henrik Nortamo, Aleksi Nummelin, Matteo Nurisso, Pablo Ortega, Stella Paronuzzi, Xabier Pedruzo Bagazgoitia, Charles Pelletier, Carlos Peña, Suraj Polade, Himansu Pradhan, Rommel Quintanilla, Tiago Quintino, Thomas Rackow, Jouni Räisänen, Maqsood Mubarak Rajput, René Redler, Balthasar Reuter, Nuno Rocha Monteiro, Francesc Roura-Adserias, Silva Ruppert, Susan Sayed, Reiner Schnur, Tanvi Sharma, Dmitry Sidorenko, Outi Sievi-Korte, Albert Soret, Christian Steger, Bjorn Stevens, Jan Streffing, Jaleena Sunny, Luiggi Tenorio, Stephan Thober, Ulf Tigerstedt, Oriol Tinto, Juha Tonttila, Heikki Tuomenvirta, Lauri Tuppi, Ginka Van Thielen, Emanuele Vitali, Jost von Hardenberg, Ingo Wagner, Nils Wedi, Jan Wehner, Sven Willner, Xavier Yepes-Arbós, Florian Ziemen, and Janos Zimmermann
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2198, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2198, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Geoscientific Model Development (GMD).
Short summary
Short summary
The Climate Change Adaptation Digital Twin (Climate DT) pioneers the operationalisation of climate projections. The system produces global simulations with local granularity for adaptation decision-making. Applications are embedded to generate tailored indicators. A unified workflow orchestrates all components in several supercomputers. Data management ensures consistency and streaming enables real-time use. It is a complementary innovation to initiatives like CMIP, CORDEX, and climate services.
Sebastian Müller, Martin Lange, Thomas Fischer, Sara König, Matthias Kelbling, Jeisson Javier Leal Rojas, and Stephan Thober
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 4483–4498, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4483-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-4483-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study presents FINAM (
FINAM is not a model), a new coupling framework written in Python to dynamically connect independently developed models. Python, as the ultimate glue language, enables the use of codes from nearly any programming language like Fortran, C++, Rust, and others. FINAM is designed to simplify the integration of various models with minimal effort, as demonstrated through various examples ranging from simple to complex systems.
Sarah Quỳnh-Giang Ho and Uwe Ehret
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 29, 2785–2810, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-2785-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-2785-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
In this paper, we use models to demonstrate that even small flood reservoirs – which capture water to avoid floods downstream – can be repurposed to release water in drier conditions without affecting their ability to protect against floods. By capturing water and releasing it once levels are low, we show that reservoirs can greatly increase the water available in drought. Having more water available to the reservoir, however, is not necessarily better for drought protection.
Daniel Viviroli, Martin Jury, Maria Staudinger, Martina Kauzlaric, Heimo Truhez, and Douglas Maraun
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1920, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1920, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences (NHESS).
Short summary
Short summary
Estimating the frequency and magnitude of floods is challenging due to the limited length of streamflow records. Here, we explore whether an extensive archive of meteorological forecasts run over past dates can assist in this context. After processing and concatenating these data for use as input to a hydrological model, we derive flood statistics from simulated streamflow. Results are promising for the larger catchments studied, providing a valuable complementary perspective on rare floods.
Sergiy Vorogushyn, Li Han, Heiko Apel, Viet Dung Nguyen, Björn Guse, Xiaoxiang Guan, Oldrich Rakovec, Husain Najafi, Luis Samaniego, and Bruno Merz
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 2007–2029, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-25-2007-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-25-2007-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The July 2021 flood in central Europe was one of the deadliest floods in Europe in the recent decades and the most expensive flood in Germany. In this paper, we show that the hydrological impact of this event in the Ahr valley could have been even worse if the rainfall footprint trajectory had been only slightly different. The presented methodology of spatial counterfactuals generates plausible unprecedented events and helps to better prepare for future extreme floods.
Judith Nijzink, Ralf Loritz, Laurent Gourdol, Davide Zoccatelli, Jean François Iffly, and Laurent Pfister
Earth Syst. Sci. Data Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-482, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-482, 2025
Preprint under review for ESSD
Short summary
Short summary
The CAMELS-LUX dataset (Catchment Attributes and MEteorology for Large-sample Studies – LUXembourg) contains hydrologic, meteorologic and thunderstorm formation relevant atmospheric time series of 56 Luxembourgish catchments (2004–2021). These catchments are characterized by a large physiographic variety on a relatively small scale in a homogeneous climate. The dataset can be applied for (regional) hydrological analyses.
Sandra Pool, Keirnan Fowler, Hansini Gardiya Weligamage, and Murray Peel
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1598, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1598, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Multivariate calibration has become a widely used method to improve model realism. We found that multivariate calibration can lead to less constrained flux maps and more uncertain hydrographs relative to univariate calibration. These symptoms could be caused by non-overlapping behavioural parameter distributions for the individual calibration variables. The results emphasize that the value of non-discharge data in calibration is contingent on the suitability of the model structure.
Manuel Álvarez Chaves, Eduardo Acuña Espinoza, Uwe Ehret, and Anneli Guthke
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1699, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1699, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study evaluates hybrid hydrological models that combine physics-based and data-driven components, using Information Theory to measure their relative contributions. When testing conceptual models with LSTMs that adjust parameters over time, we found performance primarily comes from the data-driven component, with physics constraints adding minimal value. We propose a quantitative tool to analyse this behaviour and suggest a workflow for diagnosing hybrid models.
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.
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.
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.
Maria Staudinger, Martina Kauzlaric, Alexandre Mas, Guillaume Evin, Benoit Hingray, and Daniel Viviroli
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 247–265, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-25-247-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-25-247-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Various combinations of antecedent conditions and precipitation result in floods of varying degrees. Antecedent conditions played a crucial role in generating even large ones. The key predictors and spatial patterns of antecedent conditions leading to flooding at the basin's outlet were distinct. Precipitation and soil moisture from almost all sub-catchments were important for more frequent floods. For rarer events, only the predictors of specific sub-catchments were important.
Ashish Manoj J, Ralf Loritz, Hoshin Gupta, and Erwin Zehe
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2024-375, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2024-375, 2024
Revised manuscript under review for HESS
Short summary
Short summary
Traditional hydrological models typically operate in a forward mode, simulating streamflow and other catchment fluxes based on precipitation input. In this study, we explored the possibility of reversing this process—inferring precipitation from streamflow data—to improve flood event modelling. We then used the generated precipitation series to run hydrological models, resulting in more accurate estimates of streamflow and soil moisture.
Ralf Loritz, Alexander Dolich, Eduardo Acuña Espinoza, Pia Ebeling, Björn Guse, Jonas Götte, Sibylle K. Hassler, Corina Hauffe, Ingo Heidbüchel, Jens Kiesel, Mirko Mälicke, Hannes Müller-Thomy, Michael Stölzle, and Larisa Tarasova
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 16, 5625–5642, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-5625-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-5625-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The CAMELS-DE dataset features data from 1582 streamflow gauges across Germany, with records spanning from 1951 to 2020. This comprehensive dataset, which includes time series of up to 70 years (median 46 years), enables advanced research on water flow and environmental trends and supports the development of hydrological models.
Sven Armin Westermann, Anke Hildebrandt, Souhail Bousetta, and Stephan Thober
Biogeosciences, 21, 5277–5303, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-5277-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-5277-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Plants at the land surface mediate between soil and the atmosphere regarding water and carbon transport. Since plant growth is a dynamic process, models need to consider these dynamics. Two models that predict water and carbon fluxes by considering plant temporal evolution were tested against observational data. Currently, dynamizing plants in these models did not enhance their representativeness, which is caused by a mismatch between implemented physical relations and observable connections.
Andrea L. Campoverde, Uwe Ehret, Patrick Ludwig, and Joaquim G. Pinto
Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2024-134, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2024-134, 2024
Revised manuscript not accepted
Short summary
Short summary
We looked at how well the model WRF-Hydro performed during the 2018 drought event in the River Rhine basin, even though it is typically used for floods. We used the meteorological ERA5 reanalysis dataset to simulate River Rhine’s streamflow and adjusted the model using parameters and actual discharge measurements. We focused on Lake Constance, a key part of the basin, but found issues with the model’s lake outflow simulation. By removing the lake module, we obtained more accurate results.
Max Weißenborn, Lutz Breuer, and Tobias Houska
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2024-183, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2024-183, 2024
Revised manuscript accepted for HESS
Short summary
Short summary
Our study compares neural network models for predicting discharge in ungauged basins. We evaluated Convolutional Neural Networks (CNN), Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) and Gated Recurrent Units (GRU) using 28 years of weather data. CNN showed the best accuracy, while GRU were faster and nearly as accurate. Adding static features improved all models. The research enhances flood forecasting and water management in regions lacking direct measurements, offering efficient and accurate predictive tools.
Eduardo Acuña Espinoza, Ralf Loritz, Manuel Álvarez Chaves, Nicole Bäuerle, and Uwe Ehret
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 2705–2719, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-2705-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-2705-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Hydrological hybrid models promise to merge the performance of deep learning methods with the interpretability of process-based models. One hybrid approach is the dynamic parameterization of conceptual models using long short-term memory (LSTM) networks. We explored this method to evaluate the effect of the flexibility given by LSTMs on the process-based part.
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.
Ayenew D. Ayalew, Paul D. Wagner, Dejene Sahlu, and Nicola Fohrer
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 1853–1872, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-1853-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-1853-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The study presents a pioneering comprehensive integrated approach to unravel hydrological complexities in data-scarce regions. By integrating diverse data sources and advanced analytics, we offer a holistic understanding of water systems, unveiling hidden patterns and driving factors. This innovative method holds immense promise for informed decision-making and sustainable water resource management, addressing a critical need in hydrological science.
Elena Macdonald, Bruno Merz, Björn Guse, Viet Dung Nguyen, Xiaoxiang Guan, and Sergiy Vorogushyn
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 833–850, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-833-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-833-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
In some rivers, the occurrence of extreme flood events is more likely than in other rivers – they have heavy-tailed distributions. We find that threshold processes in the runoff generation lead to such a relatively high occurrence probability of extremes. Further, we find that beyond a certain return period, i.e. for rare events, rainfall is often the dominant control compared to runoff generation. Our results can help to improve the estimation of the occurrence probability of extreme floods.
Marvin Höge, Martina Kauzlaric, Rosi Siber, Ursula Schönenberger, Pascal Horton, Jan Schwanbeck, Marius Günter Floriancic, Daniel Viviroli, Sibylle Wilhelm, Anna E. Sikorska-Senoner, Nans Addor, Manuela Brunner, Sandra Pool, Massimiliano Zappa, and Fabrizio Fenicia
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 15, 5755–5784, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-5755-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-5755-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
CAMELS-CH is an open large-sample hydro-meteorological data set that covers 331 catchments in hydrologic Switzerland from 1 January 1981 to 31 December 2020. It comprises (a) daily data of river discharge and water level as well as meteorologic variables like precipitation and temperature; (b) yearly glacier and land cover data; (c) static attributes of, e.g, topography or human impact; and (d) catchment delineations. CAMELS-CH enables water and climate research and modeling at catchment level.
Elizabeth Gachibu Wangari, Ricky Mwangada Mwanake, Tobias Houska, David Kraus, Gretchen Maria Gettel, Ralf Kiese, Lutz Breuer, and Klaus Butterbach-Bahl
Biogeosciences, 20, 5029–5067, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-5029-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-5029-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Agricultural landscapes act as sinks or sources of the greenhouse gases (GHGs) CO2, CH4, or N2O. Various physicochemical and biological processes control the fluxes of these GHGs between ecosystems and the atmosphere. Therefore, fluxes depend on environmental conditions such as soil moisture, soil temperature, or soil parameters, which result in large spatial and temporal variations of GHG fluxes. Here, we describe an example of how this variation may be studied and analyzed.
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.
Ricky Mwangada Mwanake, Gretchen Maria Gettel, Elizabeth Gachibu Wangari, Clarissa Glaser, Tobias Houska, Lutz Breuer, Klaus Butterbach-Bahl, and Ralf Kiese
Biogeosciences, 20, 3395–3422, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-3395-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-20-3395-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Despite occupying <1 %; of the globe, streams are significant sources of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. In this study, we determined anthropogenic effects on GHG emissions from streams. We found that anthropogenic-influenced streams had up to 20 times more annual GHG emissions than natural ones and were also responsible for seasonal peaks. Anthropogenic influences also altered declining GHG flux trends with stream size, with potential impacts on stream-size-based spatial upscaling techniques.
Uwe Ehret and Pankaj Dey
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 27, 2591–2605, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-2591-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-2591-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We propose the
c-u-curvemethod to characterize dynamical (time-variable) systems of all kinds.
Uis for uncertainty and expresses how well a system can be predicted in a given period of time.
Cis for complexity and expresses how predictability differs between different periods, i.e. how well predictability itself can be predicted. The method helps to better classify and compare dynamical systems across a wide range of disciplines, thus facilitating scientific collaboration.
Patrick Ludwig, Florian Ehmele, Mário J. Franca, Susanna Mohr, Alberto Caldas-Alvarez, James E. Daniell, Uwe Ehret, Hendrik Feldmann, Marie Hundhausen, Peter Knippertz, Katharina Küpfer, Michael Kunz, Bernhard Mühr, Joaquim G. Pinto, Julian Quinting, Andreas M. Schäfer, Frank Seidel, and Christina Wisotzky
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 1287–1311, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-23-1287-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-23-1287-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Heavy precipitation in July 2021 led to widespread floods in western Germany and neighboring countries. The event was among the five heaviest precipitation events of the past 70 years in Germany, and the river discharges exceeded by far the statistical 100-year return values. Simulations of the event under future climate conditions revealed a strong and non-linear effect on flood peaks: for +2 K global warming, an 18 % increase in rainfall led to a 39 % increase of the flood peak in the Ahr river.
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.
Susanna Mohr, Uwe Ehret, Michael Kunz, Patrick Ludwig, Alberto Caldas-Alvarez, James E. Daniell, Florian Ehmele, Hendrik Feldmann, Mário J. Franca, Christian Gattke, Marie Hundhausen, Peter Knippertz, Katharina Küpfer, Bernhard Mühr, Joaquim G. Pinto, Julian Quinting, Andreas M. Schäfer, Marc Scheibel, Frank Seidel, and Christina Wisotzky
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 525–551, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-23-525-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-23-525-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The flood event in July 2021 was one of the most severe disasters in Europe in the last half century. The objective of this two-part study is a multi-disciplinary assessment that examines the complex process interactions in different compartments, from meteorology to hydrological conditions to hydro-morphological processes to impacts on assets and environment. In addition, we address the question of what measures are possible to generate added value to early response management.
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.
Friedrich Boeing, Oldrich Rakovec, Rohini Kumar, Luis Samaniego, Martin Schrön, Anke Hildebrandt, Corinna Rebmann, Stephan Thober, Sebastian Müller, Steffen Zacharias, Heye Bogena, Katrin Schneider, Ralf Kiese, Sabine Attinger, and Andreas Marx
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 5137–5161, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-5137-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-5137-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
In this paper, we deliver an evaluation of the second generation operational German drought monitor (https://www.ufz.de/duerremonitor) with a state-of-the-art compilation of observed soil moisture data from 40 locations and four different measurement methods in Germany. We show that the expressed stakeholder needs for higher resolution drought information at the one-kilometer scale can be met and that the agreement of simulated and observed soil moisture dynamics can be moderately improved.
Ralf Loritz, Maoya Bassiouni, Anke Hildebrandt, Sibylle K. Hassler, and Erwin Zehe
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 4757–4771, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-4757-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-4757-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
In this study, we combine a deep-learning approach that predicts sap flow with a hydrological model to improve soil moisture and transpiration estimates at the catchment scale. Our results highlight that hybrid-model approaches, combining machine learning with physically based models, are a promising way to improve our ability to make hydrological predictions.
Bahar Bahrami, Anke Hildebrandt, Stephan Thober, Corinna Rebmann, Rico Fischer, Luis Samaniego, Oldrich Rakovec, and Rohini Kumar
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 6957–6984, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-6957-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-6957-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Leaf area index (LAI) and gross primary productivity (GPP) are crucial components to carbon cycle, and are closely linked to water cycle in many ways. We develop a Parsimonious Canopy Model (PCM) to simulate GPP and LAI at stand scale, and show its applicability over a diverse range of deciduous broad-leaved forest biomes. With its modular structure, the PCM is able to adapt with existing data requirements, and run in either a stand-alone mode or as an interface linked to hydrologic models.
Daniel Viviroli, Anna E. Sikorska-Senoner, Guillaume Evin, Maria Staudinger, Martina Kauzlaric, Jérémy Chardon, Anne-Catherine Favre, Benoit Hingray, Gilles Nicolet, Damien Raynaud, Jan Seibert, Rolf Weingartner, and Calvin Whealton
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 2891–2920, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-22-2891-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-22-2891-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Estimating the magnitude of rare to very rare floods is a challenging task due to a lack of sufficiently long observations. The challenge is even greater in large river basins, where precipitation patterns and amounts differ considerably between individual events and floods from different parts of the basin coincide. We show that a hydrometeorological model chain can provide plausible estimates in this setting and can thus inform flood risk and safety assessments for critical infrastructure.
Juliane Mai, Hongren Shen, Bryan A. Tolson, Étienne Gaborit, Richard Arsenault, James R. Craig, Vincent Fortin, Lauren M. Fry, Martin Gauch, Daniel Klotz, Frederik Kratzert, Nicole O'Brien, Daniel G. Princz, Sinan Rasiya Koya, Tirthankar Roy, Frank Seglenieks, Narayan K. Shrestha, André G. T. Temgoua, Vincent Vionnet, and Jonathan W. Waddell
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 3537–3572, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-3537-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-3537-2022, 2022
Short summary
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.
Wouter J. M. Knoben and Diana Spieler
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 3299–3314, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-3299-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-3299-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
This paper introduces educational materials that can be used to teach students about model structure uncertainty in hydrological modelling. There are many different hydrological models and differences between these models impact their usefulness in different places. Such models are often used to support decision making about water resources and to perform hydrological science, and it is thus important for students to understand that model choice matters.
Katrin M. Nissen, Stefan Rupp, Thomas M. Kreuzer, Björn Guse, Bodo Damm, and Uwe Ulbrich
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 2117–2130, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-22-2117-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-22-2117-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
A statistical model is introduced which quantifies the influence of individual potential triggering factors and their interactions on rockfall probability in central Europe. The most important factor is daily precipitation, which is most effective if sub-surface moisture levels are high. Freeze–thaw cycles in the preceding days can further increase the rockfall hazard. The model can be applied to climate simulations in order to investigate the effect of climate change on rockfall probability.
Chaogui Lei, Paul D. Wagner, and Nicola Fohrer
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 2561–2582, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-2561-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-2561-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We presented an integrated approach to hydrologic modeling and partial least squares regression quantifying land use change impacts on water and nutrient balance over 3 decades. Results highlight that most variations (70 %–80 %) in water quantity and quality variables are explained by changes in land use class-specific areas and landscape metrics. Arable land influences water quantity and quality the most. The study provides insights on water resources management in rural lowland catchments.
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.
Alexander Sternagel, Ralf Loritz, Brian Berkowitz, and Erwin Zehe
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 1615–1629, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-1615-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-1615-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
We present a (physically based) Lagrangian approach to simulate diffusive mixing processes on the pore scale beyond perfectly mixed conditions. Results show the feasibility of the approach for reproducing measured mixing times and concentrations of isotopes over pore sizes and that typical shapes of breakthrough curves (normally associated with non-uniform transport in heterogeneous soils) may also occur as a result of imperfect subscale mixing in a macroscopically homogeneous soil matrix.
Robert Schweppe, Stephan Thober, Sebastian Müller, Matthias Kelbling, Rohini Kumar, Sabine Attinger, and Luis Samaniego
Geosci. Model Dev., 15, 859–882, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-859-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-859-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The recently released multiscale parameter regionalization (MPR) tool enables
environmental modelers to efficiently use extensive datasets for model setups.
It flexibly ingests the datasets using user-defined data–parameter relationships
and rescales parameter fields to given model resolutions. Modern
land surface models especially benefit from MPR through increased transparency and
flexibility in modeling decisions. Thus, MPR empowers more sound and robust
simulations of the Earth system.
Michael Peichl, Stephan Thober, Luis Samaniego, Bernd Hansjürgens, and Andreas Marx
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 6523–6545, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-6523-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-6523-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Using a statistical model that can also take complex systems into account, the most important factors affecting wheat yield in Germany are determined. Different spatial damage potentials are taken into account. In many parts of Germany, yield losses are caused by too much soil water in spring. Negative heat effects as well as damaging soil drought are identified especially for north-eastern Germany. The model is able to explain years with exceptionally high yields (2014) and losses (2003, 2018).
Erwin Zehe, Ralf Loritz, Yaniv Edery, and Brian Berkowitz
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 5337–5353, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-5337-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-5337-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This study uses the concepts of entropy and work to quantify and explain the emergence of preferential flow and transport in heterogeneous saturated porous media. We found that the downstream concentration of solutes in preferential pathways implies a downstream declining entropy in the transverse distribution of solute transport pathways. Preferential flow patterns with lower entropies emerged within media of higher heterogeneity – a stronger self-organization despite a higher randomness.
Nariman Mahmoodi, Jens Kiesel, Paul D. Wagner, and Nicola Fohrer
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 5065–5081, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-5065-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-5065-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
In this study, we assessed the sustainability of water resources in a wadi region with the help of a hydrologic model. Our assessment showed that the increases in groundwater demand and consumption exacerbate the negative impact of climate change on groundwater sustainability and hydrologic regime alteration. These alterations have severe consequences for a downstream wetland and its ecosystem. The approach may be applicable in other wadi regions with different climate and water use systems.
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.
Alexander Sternagel, Ralf Loritz, Julian Klaus, Brian Berkowitz, and Erwin Zehe
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 1483–1508, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-1483-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-1483-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The key innovation of the study is a method to simulate reactive solute transport in the vadose zone within a Lagrangian framework. We extend the LAST-Model with a method to account for non-linear sorption and first-order degradation processes during unsaturated transport of reactive substances in the matrix and macropores. Model evaluations using bromide and pesticide data from irrigation experiments under different flow conditions on various timescales show the feasibility of the method.
Lieke Anna Melsen and Björn Guse
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 1307–1332, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-1307-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-1307-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Certain hydrological processes become more or less relevant when the climate changes. This should also be visible in the models that are used for long-term predictions of river flow as a consequence of climate change. We investigated this using three different models. The change in relevance should be reflected in how the parameters of the models are determined. In the different models, different processes become more relevant in the future: they disagree with each other.
Elnaz Azmi, Uwe Ehret, Steven V. Weijs, Benjamin L. Ruddell, and Rui A. P. Perdigão
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 1103–1115, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-1103-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-1103-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Computer models should be as simple as possible but not simpler. Simplicity refers to the length of the model and the effort it takes the model to generate its output. Here we present a practical technique for measuring the latter by the number of memory visits during model execution by
Strace, a troubleshooting and monitoring program. The advantage of this approach is that it can be applied to any computer-based model, which facilitates model intercomparison.
Ralf Loritz, Markus Hrachowitz, Malte Neuper, and Erwin Zehe
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 147–167, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-147-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-147-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
This study investigates the role and value of distributed rainfall in the runoff generation of a mesoscale catchment. We compare the performance of different hydrological models at different periods and show that a distributed model driven by distributed rainfall yields improved performances only during certain periods. We then step beyond this finding and develop a spatially adaptive model that is capable of dynamically adjusting its spatial model structure in time.
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
Maria Staudinger, Stefan Seeger, Barbara Herbstritt, Michael Stoelzle, Jan Seibert, Kerstin Stahl, and Markus Weiler
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 12, 3057–3066, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-3057-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-3057-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
The data set CH-IRP provides isotope composition in precipitation and streamflow from 23 Swiss catchments, being unique regarding its long-term multi-catchment coverage along an alpine–pre-alpine gradient. CH-IRP contains fortnightly time series of stable water isotopes from streamflow grab samples complemented by time series in precipitation. Sampling conditions, catchment and climate information, lab standards and errors are provided together with areal precipitation and catchment boundaries.
Cited articles
Abhinav, G. and Rao, S. G.: Uncertainty quantification in watershed hydrology: Which method to use?, Journal of Hydrology, 616, 128749, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2022.128749, 2023. a
Acuña Espinoza, E., Loritz, R., Álvarez Chaves, M., Bäuerle, N., and Ehret, U.: To bucket or not to bucket? Analyzing the performance and interpretability of hybrid hydrological models with dynamic parameterization, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 2705–2719, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-2705-2024, 2024. a, b, c
Arnold, J. G., Srinivasan, R., Muttiah, R. S., and Williams, J. R.: Large area hydrologic modeling and assessment part I: model development 1, JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 34, 73–89, 1998. a
Ayzel, G. and Heistermann, M.: The effect of calibration data length on the performance of a conceptual hydrological model versus LSTM and GRU: A case study for six basins from the CAMELS dataset, Computers & Geosciences, 149, 104708, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2021.104708, 2021. a
Azmi, E., Ehret, U., Weijs, S. V., Ruddell, B. L., and Perdigão, R. A. P.: Technical note: “Bit by bit”: a practical and general approach for evaluating model computational complexity vs. model performance, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 1103–1115, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-1103-2021, 2021. a
BGR: Bodenuebersichtskarte im Massstab 1:200000, Verbreitung der Bodengesellschaften, https://www.bgr.bund.de/DE/Themen/Boden/Projekte/Flaechen_Rauminformationen_Boden/BUEK200/BUEK200.html (last access: 29 September 2025), 1999. a
Bieger, K., Arnold, J. G., Rathjens, H., White, M. J., Bosch, D. D., Allen, P. M., Volk, M., and Srinivasan, R.: Introduction to SWAT+, A Completely Restructured Version of the Soil and Water Assessment Tool, JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 53, 115–130, https://doi.org/10.1111/1752-1688.12482, 2017. a
Boeing, F., Rakovec, O., Kumar, R., Samaniego, L., Schrön, M., Hildebrandt, A., Rebmann, C., Thober, S., Müller, S., Zacharias, S., Bogena, H., Schneider, K., Kiese, R., Attinger, S., and Marx, A.: High-resolution drought simulations and comparison to soil moisture observations in Germany, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 5137–5161, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-5137-2022, 2022. a
Brath, A., Montanari, A., and Toth, E.: Analysis of the effects of different scenarios of historical data availability on the calibration of a spatially-distributed hydrological model, Journal of Hydrology, 291, 232–253, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2003.12.044, 2004. a, b
CLMS: CORINE land use, EEA geospatial data catalogue [data set], https://doi.org/10.2909/960998c1-1870-4e82-8051-6485205ebbac, 2019. a, b, c
Correa, A., Windhorst, D., Crespo, P., Célleri, R., Feyen, J., and Breuer, L.: Continuous versus event-based sampling: how many samples are required for deriving general hydrological understanding on Ecuador's páramo region?, Hydrological Processes, 30, 4059–4073, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.10975, 2016. a
Cover, T. and Thomas, J. A.: Elements of Information Theory, Wiley Series in Telecommunications and Signal Processing, Wiley-Interscience, ISBN 9780471241959, 2006. 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, Environmental Modelling & Software, 129, 104728, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2020.104728, 2020. a
Daliakopoulos, I. N., Coulibaly, P., and Tsanis, I. K.: Groundwater level forecasting using artificial neural networks, Journal of Hydrology, 309, 229–240, 2005. a
De la Fuente, L. A., Ehsani, M. R., Gupta, H. V., and Condon, L. E.: Toward interpretable LSTM-based modeling of hydrological systems, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 945–971, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-945-2024, 2024. a
Devia, G. K., Ganasri, B., and Dwarakish, G.: A Review on Hydrological Models, Aquatic Procedia, 4, 1001–1007, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aqpro.2015.02.126, 2015. a
Douglas, D. H. and Peucker, T. K.: Algorithms for the reduction of the number of points required to represent a digitized line or its caricature, Cartographica: The International Journal for Geographic Information and Geovisualization, 10, 112–122, 1973. a
Ehret, U. and Dey, P.: Technical note: Complexity–uncertainty curve (c-u-curve) – a method to analyse, classify and compare dynamical systems, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 27, 2591–2605, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-2591-2023, 2023. a
Fan, H., Jiang, M., Xu, L., Zhu, H., Cheng, J., and Jiang, J.: Comparison of long short term memory networks and the hydrological model in runoff simulation, Water, 12, 175, https://doi.org/10.3390/w12010175, 2020. a
Foroozand, H. and Weijs, S. V.: Objective functions for information-theoretical monitoring network design: what is “optimal”?, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 831–850, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-831-2021, 2021. a
Girihagama, L., Naveed Khaliq, M., Lamontagne, P., Perdikaris, J., Roy, R., Sushama, L., and Elshorbagy, A.: Streamflow modelling and forecasting for Canadian watersheds using LSTM networks with attention mechanism, Neural Computing and Applications, 34, 19995–20015, 2022. a
Gupta, H. V., Kling, H., Yilmaz, K. K., and Martinez, G. F.: Decomposition of the mean squared error and NSE performance criteria: Implications for improving hydrological modelling, Journal of Hydrology, 377, 80–91, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.08.003, 2009. a
Guse, B., Pfannerstill, M., Kiesel, J., Strauch, M., Volk, M., and Fohrer, N.: Analysing spatio-temporal process and parameter dynamics in models to characterise contrasting catchments, J. Hydrol., 507, 863–874, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2018.12.050, 2019. a
Harlin, J.: Development of a process oriented calibration scheme for the HBV hydrological model, Hydrology Research, 22, 15–36, 1991. a
Houska, T., Kraft, P., Chamorro-Chavez, A., and Breuer, L.: SPOTting Model Parameters Using a Ready-Made Python Package, PLOS ONE, 10, 1–22, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0145180, 2015. a
Hsu, K.-l., Gupta, H. V., and Sorooshian, S.: Artificial Neural Network Modeling of the Rainfall-Runoff Process, Water Resources Research, 31, 2517–2530, https://doi.org/10.1029/95WR01955, 1995. a
Huang, Y., Bárdossy, A., and Zhang, K.: Sensitivity of hydrological models to temporal and spatial resolutions of rainfall data, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 2647–2663, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-2647-2019, 2019. a
Jiang, P., Pin, S., Alexander, Y. S., and Xingyuan, C.: Optimizing parameter learning and calibration in an integrated hydrological model: Impact of observation length and information, Journal of Hydrology, 643, 131889, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2024.131889, 2024a. a
Jiang, P., Shuai, P., Sun, A. Y., and Chen, X.: Optimizing parameter learning and calibration in an integrated hydrological model: Impact of observation length and information, Journal of Hydrology, 643, 131889, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2024.131889, 2024b. a
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 Resources Research, 58, e2021WR030185, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021WR030185, 2022. a
Knoben, W. J. M.: Setting expectations for hydrologic model performance with an ensemble of simple benchmarks, Hydrological Processes, 38, e15288, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.15288, 2024. 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, b, c
Kratzert, F., Gauch, M., Klotz, D., and Nearing, G.: HESS Opinions: Never train a Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) network on a single basin, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 4187–4201, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-4187-2024, 2024. a
Kuana, L. A., Almeida, A. S., Mercuri, E. G. F., and Noe, S. M.: Regionalization of GR4J model parameters for river flow prediction in Paraná, Brazil, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 3367–3390, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-3367-2024, 2024. a
Kumar, P. and Gupta, H. V.: Debates – Does Information Theory Provide a New Paradigm for Earth Science?, Water Resources Research, 56, e2019WR026398, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019WR026398, 2020. a
Lopez, M. G. and Seibert, J.: Influence of hydro-meteorological data spatial aggregation on streamflow modelling, Journal of Hydrology, 541, 1212–1220, 2016. a
Loritz, R., Dolich, A., Acuña Espinoza, E., Ebeling, P., Guse, B., Götte, J., Hassler, S. K., Hauffe, C., Heidbüchel, I., Kiesel, J., Mälicke, M., Müller-Thomy, H., Stölzle, M., and Tarasova, L.: CAMELS-DE: hydro-meteorological time series and attributes for 1582 catchments in Germany, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 16, 5625–5642, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-5625-2024, 2024. a
Mai, J.: Ten strategies towards successful calibration of environmental models, Journal of Hydrology, 620, 129414, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2023.129414, 2023. a
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, 2022. a
Moges, E., Ruddell, B. L., Zhang, L., Driscoll, J. M., and Larsen, L. G.: Strength and Memory of Precipitation's Control Over Streamflow Across the Conterminous United States, Water Resources Research, 58, e2021WR030186, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021WR030186, 2022. a
Mohanty, S., Jha, M. K., Raul, S., Panda, R., and Sudheer, K.: Using artificial neural network approach for simultaneous forecasting of weekly groundwater levels at multiple sites, Water Resources Management, 29, 5521–5532, 2015. a
Nearing, G. S., Ruddell, B. L., Clark, M. P., Nijssen, B., and Peters-Lidard, C.: Benchmarking and Process Diagnostics of Land Models, Journal of Hydrometeorology, 19, 1835–1852, https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-17-0209.1, 2018. a
Neuper, M. and Ehret, U.: Quantitative precipitation estimation with weather radar using a data- and information-based approach, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 3711–3733, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-3711-2019, 2019. a, b
Paez-Trujilo, A., Cañon, J., Hernandez, B., Corzo, G., and Solomatine, D.: Multivariate regression trees as an “explainable machine learning” approach to explore relationships between hydroclimatic characteristics and agricultural and hydrological drought severity: case of study Cesar River basin, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 3863–3883, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-23-3863-2023, 2023. a
Pappenberger, F., Ramos, M., Cloke, H., Wetterhall, F., Alfieri, L., Bogner, K., Mueller, A., and Salamon, P.: How do I know if my forecasts are better? Using benchmarks in hydrological ensemble prediction, Journal of Hydrology, 522, 697–713, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.01.024, 2015. a
Perrin, C., Michel, C., and Andréassian, V.: Improvement of a parsimonious model for streamflow simulation, Journal of Hydrology, 279, 275–289, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(03)00225-7, 2003. a
Perrin, C., Oudin, L., Andreassian, V., Rojas-Serna, C., Michel, C., and Mathevet, T.: Impact of limited streamflow data on the efficiency and the parameters of rainfall – runoff models, Hydrological Sciences Journal, 52, 131–151, 2007. a
Pool, S. and Seibert, J.: Gauging ungauged catchments – Active learning for the timing of point discharge observations in combination with continuous water level measurements, Journal of Hydrology, 598, 126448, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2021.126448, 2021. a
Pool, S., Viviroli, D., and Seibert, J.: Prediction of hydrographs and flow-duration curves in almost ungauged catchments: Which runoff measurements are most informative for model calibration?, Journal of Hydrology, 554, 613–622, 2017. a
Rakovec, O., Kumar, R., Mai, J., Cuntz, M., Thober, S., Zink, M., Attinger, S., Schäfer, D., Schrön, M., and Samaniego, L.: Multiscale and Multivariate Evaluation of Water Fluxes and States over European River Basins, Journal of Hydrometeorology, 17, 287–307, https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-15-0054.1, 2016. a
Ramer, U.: An iterative procedure for the polygonal approximation of plane curves, Computer Graphics and Image Processing, 1, 244–256, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0146-664X(72)80017-0, 1972. a
Reichstein, M., Camps-Valls, G., Stevens, B., Jung, M., Denzler, J., Carvalhais, N., and Prabhat: Deep learning and process understanding for data-driven Earth system science, Nature, 566, 195–204, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-0912-1, 2019. a
Renteria-Mena, J. B., Plaza, D., and Giraldo, E.: Multivariable NARX Based Neural Networks Models for Short-Term Water Level Forecasting, Engineering Proceedings, 39, 60, https://doi.org/10.3390/engproc2023039060, 2023. a
Rojas-Serna, C., Michel, C., Perrin, C., Andréassian, V., Hall, A., Chahinian, N., and Schaake, J.: Ungauged catchments: how to make the most of a few streamflow measurements?, IAHS Publication, 307, 230, https://iahs.info/uploads/dms/13616.23-230-236-43-ROJAS-SERNA.pdf (last access: 29 September 2025), 2006. a
Ruddell, B. L., Drewry, D. T., and Nearing, G. S.: Information Theory for Model Diagnostics: Structural Error is Indicated by Trade-Off Between Functional and Predictive Performance, Water Resources Research, 55, 6534–6554, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018WR023692, 2019. a
Schoppa, L., Disse, M., and Bachmair, S.: Evaluating the performance of random forest for large-scale flood discharge simulation, Journal of Hydrology, 590, 125531, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2020.125531, 2020. a
Seibert, J.: On the need for benchmarks in hydrological modelling, Hydrological Processes, 15, 1063–1064, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.446, 2001. a, b
Seibert, J. and Beven, K. J.: Gauging the ungauged basin: how many discharge measurements are needed?, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 13, 883–892, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-13-883-2009, 2009. a
Seibert, J. and Vis, M. J. P.: Teaching hydrological modeling with a user-friendly catchment-runoff-model software package, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 16, 3315–3325, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-16-3315-2012, 2012. a
Seibert, J., Vis, M. J. P., Lewis, E., and van Meerveld, H.: Upper and lower benchmarks in hydrological modelling, Hydrological Processes, 32, 1120–1125, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.11476, 2018. a
Shen, C.: A transdisciplinary review of deep learning research and its relevance for water resources scientists, Water Resources Research, 54, 8558–8593, 2018. a
Shen, C., Appling, A. P., Gentine, P., Bandai, T., Gupta, H., Tartakovsky, A., Baity-Jesi, M., Fenicia, F., Kifer, D., Li, L., Liu, X., Ren, W., Zheng, Y., Harman, C. J., Clark, M., Farthing, M., Feng, D., Kumar, P., Aboelyazeed, D., Rahmani, F., Song, Y., Beck, H. E., Bindas, T., Dwivedi, D., Fang, K., Höge, M., Rackauckas, C., Mohanty, B., Roy, T., Xu, C., and Lawson, K.: Differentiable modelling to unify machine learning and physical models for geosciences, Nature Reviews Earth & Environment, 4, 552–567, https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-023-00450-9, 2023. a
Shen, H., Tolson, B. A., and Mai, J.: Time to Update the Split-Sample Approach in Hydrological Model Calibration, Water Resources Research, 58, e2021WR031523, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021WR031523, 2022. a
Singh, S. K. and Bárdossy, A.: Calibration of hydrological models on hydrologically unusual events, Advances in Water Resources, 38, 81–91, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2011.12.006, 2012. a, b
Sippel, S., Lange, H., Mahecha, M. D., Hauhs, M., Bodesheim, P., Kaminski, T., Gans, F., and Rosso, O. A.: Diagnosing the Dynamics of Observed and Simulated Ecosystem Gross Primary Productivity with Time Causal Information Theory Quantifiers, PLOS ONE, 11, e0164960, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0164960, 2016. a
Smith, K. A., Barker, L. J., Tanguy, M., Parry, S., Harrigan, S., Legg, T. P., Prudhomme, C., and Hannaford, J.: A multi-objective ensemble approach to hydrological modelling in the UK: an application to historic drought reconstruction, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 23, 3247–3268, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-3247-2019, 2019. a
Snieder, E. and Khan, U. T.: A diversity-centric strategy for the selection of spatio-temporal training data for LSTM-based streamflow forecasting, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 29, 785–798, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-785-2025, 2025. a
Sun, W., Wang, Y., Wang, G., Cui, X., Yu, J., Zuo, D., and Xu, Z.: Physically based distributed hydrological model calibration based on a short period of streamflow data: case studies in four Chinese basins, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 251–265, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-251-2017, 2017. a, b, c
Staudinger, M. and Ehret, U.: MariStau/IMPRO_infotheory_Data_Code: Data and code used to calculate conditional entropy values, Zenodo [code and data set], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14938050, 2025. a, b
Tolson, B. A., Asadzadeh, M., Maier, H. R., and Zecchin, A.: Hybrid discrete dynamically dimensioned search (HD-DDS) algorithm for water distribution system design optimization, Water Resources Research, 45, 12, https://doi.org/10.1029/2008WR007673, 2009. a
Valéry, A., Andréassian, V., and Perrin, C.: “As simple as possible but not simpler”: What is useful in a temperature-based snow-accounting routine? Part 2 – Sensitivity analysis of the Cemaneige snow accounting routine on 380 catchments, Journal of Hydrology, 517, 1176–1187, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.04.058, 2014. a
Wagner, P. D., Duethmann, D., Kiesel, J., Pool, S., Hrachowitz, M., Ceola, S., Herzog, A., Houska, T., Loritz, R., Spieler, D., Staudinger, M., Tarasova, L., Thober, S., Fohrer, N., Tetzlaff, D., Wagener, T., and Guse, B.: The Unexploited Treasures of Hydrological Observations Beyond Streamflow for Catchment Modeling, WIREs Water, 12, e70018, https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.70018, 2025. a
Wright, D. P., Thyer, M., Westra, S., and McInerney, D.: A hybrid framework for quantifying the influence of data in hydrological model calibration, Journal of Hydrology, 561, 211–222, 2018. a
Xiang, Z., Yan, J., and Demir, I.: A Rainfall-Runoff Model With LSTM-Based Sequence-to-Sequence Learning, Water Resources Research, 56, e2019WR025326, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019WR025326, 2020. a
Yamazaki, D., Ikeshima, D., Sosa, J., Bates, P. D., Allen, G. H., and Pavelsky, T. M.: MERIT Hydro: A High-Resolution Global Hydrography Map Based on Latest Topography Dataset, Water Resources Research, 55, 5053–5073, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019WR024873, 2019 (data available at: http://hydro.iis.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~yamadai/MERIT_Hydro/, last access: 29 September 2025). a, b
Yapo, P. O., Gupta, H. V., and Sorooshian, S.: Automatic calibration of conceptual rainfall-runoff models: sensitivity to calibration data, Journal of Hydrology, 181, 23–48, https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1694(95)02918-4, 1996. a, b
Zhang, K., Luhar, M., Brunner, M. I., and Parolari, A. J.: Streamflow Prediction in Poorly Gauged Watersheds in the United States Through Data-Driven Sparse Sensing, Water Resources Research, 59, e2022WR034092, https://doi.org/10.1029/2022WR034092, 2023. a, b
Zhang, Y., Chiew, F. H. S., Li, M., and Post, D.: Predicting Runoff Signatures Using Regression and Hydrological Modeling Approaches, Water Resources Research, 54, 7859–7878, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018WR023325, 2018. a
Zhang, Y., Ragettli, S., Molnar, P., Fink, O., and Peleg, N.: Generalization of an Encoder-Decoder LSTM model for flood prediction in ungauged catchments, Journal of Hydrology, 614, 128577, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2022.128577, 2022. a
Zink, M., Kumar, R., Cuntz, M., and Samaniego, L.: A high-resolution dataset of water fluxes and states for Germany accounting for parametric uncertainty, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 1769–1790, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-1769-2017, 2017. a, b
Short summary
Three process-based and four data-driven hydrological models are compared using different training data. We found that process-based models perform better with small datasets 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.
Three process-based and four data-driven hydrological models are compared using different...
