Uncertainty Hotspots in Global Hydrologic Modeling: The Impact of Precipitation and Temperature Forcings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Quantifying hydrologic modeling uncertainties originating from meteorological uncertainties is crucial yet unexplored on the global scale. This study integrates a novel ensemble meteorological dataset with process-based hydrologic models, assessing the impact of precipitation and temperature uncertainties across approximately three million subbasins globally. We introduce two metrics to identify uncertainty hotspots: one tracing the uncertainty propagation from inputs to model outputs and the other measuring the uncertainty magnitude relative to hydrologic climatology (i.e., ratio between uncertainty and climate average). Our findings reveal different uncertainty responses across hydrologic variables to the combined precipitation and temperature uncertainties. For routed river streamflow, uncertainty propagation is strong in tropical rain forests and Europe (except the Scandinavian Peninsula) but weak in the deserts, which is partly attributed to the regional differences in baseflow ratios. In contrast, both uncertainty metrics indicate low streamflow uncertainties in cryosphere areas and downstream areas of major rivers. The substantial modeling uncertainties observed, particularly in the Southern Hemisphere and less developed regions, underscore the need to improve global spatial meteorological datasets. Significance Statement Understanding how uncertainties in precipitation and temperature data affect hydrologic modeling is essential for making informed decisions. Yet, there is a gap in our global understanding of these impacts. This study tackles this challenge by using a novel ensemble meteorological dataset to drive a process-based hydrologic model across ∼3 million subbasins. We quantify the global impact of real-world precipitation and air temperature uncertainties on snow water equivalent, total soil water, total runoff, and evapotranspiration. Our findings indicate significant variations in these effects. For instance, for river streamflow, uncertainty propagation is strong in tropical rain forests and Europe (except the Scandinavian Peninsula) but weak in the deserts. Low streamflow uncertainty magnitude is observed in cryosphere areas and downstream areas of major rivers. Our research uncovers significant, diverse uncertainties in hydrological simulations across the globe, which underscores the need to improve global spatial meteorological datasets.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".