It is well known that multimodel averaging can considerably improve hydrological model simulation skill. However, the need to set up and run different models can be a time-consuming task. This work expands on the classic multimodel averaging approach by feeding models with different climate datasets and treating each version as a unique model in the ensemble. Three hydrological models and four climate datasets were combined to produce multimodel/multi-input, multimodel/monoinput and monomodel/multi-input combined flows using a weighting scheme that minimizes the root mean square error (RMSE) between the combined and observed hydrographs. The results show that model averaging improves performance significantly and that the proposed multi-input averaging provides higher skill than multimodel averaging. A combination of all models run with all datasets (12 members in total) produced the best results with the averaged hydrograph being more accurate than any single member on 70% of the catchments. The median Nash-Sutcliffe Efficiency (NSE) metric value increase was 0.07 overall in validation under the multimodel/multi-input framework, all while providing improved simulation reliability.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Arsenault et al. (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: