Articles | Volume 30, issue 12
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-30-3945-2026
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-30-3945-2026
Research article
 | 
29 Jun 2026
Research article |  | 29 Jun 2026

Comparing multi-model mosaic and multi-model combination methods to simulate streamflow across the contiguous USA

Cyril Thébault, Wouter J. M. Knoben, Nans Addor, Andrew J. Newman, Diana Spieler, Nicolás A. Vásquez, Yalan Song, Gaby J. Gründemann, Shaun Carney, Mukesh Kumar, Katie van Werkhoven, Chaopeng Shen, Andrew W. Wood, and Martyn P. Clark

Viewed

Total article views: 2,810 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total BibTeX EndNote
1,801 895 114 2,810 96 128
  • HTML: 1,801
  • PDF: 895
  • XML: 114
  • Total: 2,810
  • BibTeX: 96
  • EndNote: 128
Views and downloads (calculated since 28 Jan 2026)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 28 Jan 2026)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 2,810 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 2,780 with geography defined and 30 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 
Latest update: 13 Jul 2026
Download
Short summary
Reliable river flow prediction guide water supply planning and flood protection. We tested whether selecting or combining multiple models improves accuracy compared with a single model. 78 models were used and tested in 559 river basins across the United States. A carefully chosen single model nearly matched more complex multi-model approaches, while combining models gave slightly higher accuracy and lower uncertainty. However, no approach worked best everywhere.
Share