the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
| 28 Feb 2023
Improvement of the KarstMod modeling platform for a better assessment of karst groundwater resources
Abstract. We propose an updated version of KarstMod, an adjustable platform dedicated to lumped parameter rainfall-discharge modeling of karst aquifers. KarstMod provides a modular, user-friendly modeling environment for educational, research and operational purposes. It also includes numerical tools for time series analysis, model evaluation and sensitivity analysis. The modularity of the platform facilitates common operations related to lumped parameter rainfall-discharge modeling, such as (i) set up and parameter estimation of a relevant model structure, and (ii) evaluation of internal consistency, parameter sensitivity and hydrograph characteristics. The updated version now includes (i) external routines to better consider the input data and their related uncertainties, i.e. evapotranspiration and solid precipitation, (ii) enlargement of multi-objective calibration possibilities, allowing more flexibility in terms of objective functions as well as observation type and (iii) additional tools for model performance evaluation including further performance criteria and tools for model errors representation.
- Preprint
(6593 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: final response (author comments only)
-
RC1: 'Comment on hess-2023-17', Anonymous Referee #1, 24 Apr 2023
I reviewed the manuscript by Sivelle et al. In this manuscript, the authors present the improvement of a karst modelling platform and show an application on two case studies in France. While this work could have potential for advancing karst modelling knowledge, I found that as is, the manuscript suffers from flaws that limit the understanding and the appropriation by readers.
Namely, I would like to mention:
- The manuscript structure
- The choice of the HESS journal and of submitting this manuscript in the Research article category
- The lack of comparison between the model structure and results, and a previous version, to show the “Improvement of the KarstMod modeling platform for a better assessment of karst groundwater resources », as we could expect from the manuscript title.
Altogether, this makes me think that there is a need for making choices, possibly conjointly with the journal editor:
- Should this manuscript remain a Research article in HESS? In that case, we need clear research questions, a thorough comparison of the “new” model against the “old” one.
- Should this manuscript be limit to a modeling platform presentation? In that case, the article could be submitted to GMD instead, and some of the platform features be further presented.
I cannot make that choice for the authors and I will not recommend any of these two choices, as I think that the authors (providing some further work) can reach both objectives.
I attach to this general review an annotated pdf version of the manuscript with “on-the-fly” comments. This pdf contains both general comments, whose main points I summarised here, but also some more specific questions or suggestions.
- AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Vianney Sivelle, 14 Jul 2023
-
RC2: 'Comment on hess-2023-17', Anonymous Referee #2, 17 Jun 2023
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://hess.copernicus.org/preprints/hess-2023-17/hess-2023-17-RC2-supplement.pdf
- AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Vianney Sivelle, 14 Jul 2023
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 696 | 300 | 45 | 1,041 | 33 | 29 |
- HTML: 696
- PDF: 300
- XML: 45
- Total: 1,041
- BibTeX: 33
- EndNote: 29
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
