the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Can discharge be used to inversely correct precipitation?
Abstract. This study explores the feasibility of using the information contained in observed streamflow discharge measurements to inversely correct catchment-average precipitation time series provided by reanalysis products. We explore this possibility by training LSTM models to predict precipitation. The first model uses discharge as an input feature along with other meteorological factors, while the second model uses only the meteorological factors. Although the model provided with discharge information showed better mean performance, a detailed analysis of various time series measures across the continental scale revealed underestimation biases when compared with the original reanalysis product used for training. However, an out-of-sample test showed that the inversely estimated precipitation is better able to reproduce small-scale, high-impact events that are poorly represented in the original reanalysis product. Further, using the inversely generated precipitation time series for classical hydrological “forward” modeling resulted in improved estimates for streamflow and soil moisture. Given the notable disconnect between reanalysis products and extreme events, particularly in data-scarce regions worldwide, our findings have implications for achieving better estimates of precipitation associated with high-impact events.
- Preprint
(1752 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(738 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 16 Feb 2025)
-
RC1: 'Comment on hess-2024-375', Anonymous Referee #1, 06 Jan 2025
reply
The authors present a method to improve the estimation of catchment-average effective precipitation from the ERA5 product by utilizing the information contained in stream flow data and a regional LSTM model.
To validate this interesting approach the authors model the runoff using this catchment-average effective precipitation as forcing and compare it to the runoff in the CAMELS data set. Averaged over all catchments contained in the CAMELS data set this approach improves the modelled runoff compared to using only ERA5 precipitation estimates as forcing.
The paper is well written and has a reasonable length. However, I think the authors could address the topic of “scale” more in depth. This starts at describing the used data sets in more detail, especially by mentioning their spatial and temporal resolution. Furthermore, the selection of the out-of-sample data sets as “proof-of-concept” is restricted to very small-scale basins. It is especially at this scale that daily ERA5 precipitation will most likely not perform well as forcing for a hydrological model due to its coarse spatial resolution.
The authors state that the LSTM model is estimating catchment-average precipitation amounts. This implies that the introduced approach might not perform equally well for differently-sized basins, when the runoff dynamics shift from surface-runoff to baseflow dominated basins. In my opinion the authors should elaborate more on this topic.
The study is interesting and introduces a promising approach which is why I recommend its publication in NHESS after addressing the the attached comments.
See attached PDF for details with specific comments and technical corrections.
Data sets
Caravan - A global community dataset for large-sample hydrology F. Kratzert et al. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10968468
Model code and software
Ash-Manoj/lstm_backward: Preview release for submission (v0.1.1) Ashish Manoj J https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14161112
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
213 | 30 | 4 | 247 | 15 | 4 | 2 |
- HTML: 213
- PDF: 30
- XML: 4
- Total: 247
- Supplement: 15
- BibTeX: 4
- EndNote: 2
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1