2016
DOI: 10.1007/s10584-016-1841-8
|View full text |Cite|
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluation of an ensemble of regional hydrological models in 12 large-scale river basins worldwide

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
63
0
1

Year Published

2016
2016
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 89 publications
(67 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
3
63
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Furthermore, the model was extensively evaluated in terms of low and high flow simulations Piniewski, Szcześniak, Kundzewicz et al., ), which are quite important for the IHA indicators, many of which correspond to extreme flows. The analysis showed that the model performance for high flows was noticeably higher than for low flows (as illustrated by R 2 equal to 0.9 vs 0.61 for the calibration period), which is consistent with the recent assessment of nine hydrological models’ performance in 12 large river basins (Huang et al., ). Huang et al reported that the bias of models in the low segment of the Flow Duration Curve (FDC) was significantly higher than the bias in the high segment of the FDC.…”
Section: Study Area and Datasupporting
confidence: 86%
“…Furthermore, the model was extensively evaluated in terms of low and high flow simulations Piniewski, Szcześniak, Kundzewicz et al., ), which are quite important for the IHA indicators, many of which correspond to extreme flows. The analysis showed that the model performance for high flows was noticeably higher than for low flows (as illustrated by R 2 equal to 0.9 vs 0.61 for the calibration period), which is consistent with the recent assessment of nine hydrological models’ performance in 12 large river basins (Huang et al., ). Huang et al reported that the bias of models in the low segment of the Flow Duration Curve (FDC) was significantly higher than the bias in the high segment of the FDC.…”
Section: Study Area and Datasupporting
confidence: 86%
“…Although the uncertainty attributable to the hydrological model structure was considered here, the projections based on the HBV-D hydrological model can provide water resources managers and policy makers with important information regarding the two studied basins. Previous studies have investigated the overall performance of the HBV model and that of another seven regional hydrological models, applying them to 12 large-scale river basins worldwide (including the upper Yellow River Basin), and the results indicated that most regional hydrological models were capable of reproducing monthly discharges and seasonal dynamics successfully in all basins except one [40]. The uncertainty from the hydrological parameters is a complex issue.…”
Section: Discussion About Uncertaintiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, for the calibration and validation periods, Ens was found equal to 0.75 and 0.70, and R 2 was found equal to 0.87 and 0.84, respectively. In addition, it was established that the HBV-D model was capable of reproducing the seasonal dynamics of streamflow reasonably well for the upper reaches of the Yellow River [40].…”
Section: Hydrological Modelingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Most sensitivity studies that have been performed with LSM models with respect to infiltration–runoff processes have focused more on the analysis of runoff and river discharge (e.g., Huang et al, 2017; Materia et al, 2010; Zhang et al, 2016) and less on the sensitivity of the infiltration process to model parameters. Here we review the results from sensitivity studies on LSMs that provide information on key parameters controlling infiltration processes and thus ultimately the whole water and energy balance.…”
Section: Sensitivity Of Infiltration–runoff Process To Model Parametersmentioning
confidence: 99%