Technical note: Pitfalls in using log-transformed flows within the KGE criterion

Abstract. Log-transformed discharge is often used to calculate performance criteria to better focus on low flows. This prior transformation limits the heteroscedasticity of model residuals and was largely applied in criteria based on squared residuals, like the Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE). In the recent years, NSE has been shown to have mathematical limitations and the Kling–Gupta efficiency (KGE) was proposed as an alternative to provide more balance between the expected qualities of a model (namely representing the water balance, flow variability and correlation). As in the case of NSE, several authors used the KGE criterion (or its improved version KGE ′ ) with a prior logarithmic transformation on flows. However, we show that the use of this transformation is not adapted to the case of the KGE (or KGE ′ ) criterion and may lead to several numerical issues, potentially resulting in a biased evaluation of model performance. We present the theoretical underpinning aspects of these issues and concrete modelling examples, showing that KGE ′ computed on log-transformed flows should be avoided. Alternatives are discussed.

[1]  D. Cox,et al.  An Analysis of Transformations , 1964 .

[2]  C. Perrin,et al.  Improvement of a parsimonious model for streamflow simulation , 2003 .

[3]  S. Sorooshian,et al.  A multistep automatic calibration scheme for river forecasting models , 2000 .

[4]  G. Lacombe,et al.  Assessing hydrologic changes across the Lower Mekong Basin , 2017 .

[5]  Hoshin Vijai Gupta,et al.  Decomposition of the mean squared error and NSE performance criteria: Implications for improving hydrological modelling , 2009 .

[6]  J. Nash,et al.  River flow forecasting through conceptual models part I — A discussion of principles☆ , 1970 .

[7]  C. Perrin,et al.  A review of efficiency criteria suitable for evaluating low-flow simulations , 2012 .

[8]  Hoshin Vijai Gupta,et al.  Do Nash values have value? , 2007 .

[9]  Hoshin V. Gupta,et al.  Use of an entropy‐based metric in multiobjective calibration to improve model performance , 2014 .

[10]  Thibault Mathevet,et al.  Dynamic averaging of rainfall‐runoff model simulations from complementary model parameterizations , 2006 .

[11]  Jean-Philippe Vidal,et al.  A 50‐year high‐resolution atmospheric reanalysis over France with the Safran system , 2010 .

[12]  Ludovic Oudin,et al.  Which objective function to calibrate rainfall–runoff models for low-flow index simulations? , 2017 .

[13]  V. Klemeš,et al.  Operational Testing of Hydrological Simulation Models , 2022 .

[14]  Patrick Willems,et al.  Improving the predictions of a MIKE SHE catchment‐scale application by using a multi‐criteria approach , 2008 .

[15]  H. Kling,et al.  Runoff conditions in the upper Danube basin under an ensemble of climate change scenarios , 2012 .

[16]  Beck Hylke,et al.  Global-scale regionalization of hydrologic model parameters , 2016 .

[17]  Guillaume Thirel,et al.  The suite of lumped GR hydrological models in an R package , 2017, Environ. Model. Softw..

[18]  S. Halldin,et al.  Can climate variability information constrain a hydrological model for an ungauged Costa Rican catchment? , 2018 .

[19]  C. Perrin,et al.  Impact of temporal resolution of inputs on hydrological model performance: An analysis based on 2400 flood events , 2016 .

[20]  P. Krause,et al.  COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT EFFICIENCY CRITERIA FOR HYDROLOGICAL MODEL ASSESSMENT , 2005 .

[21]  Tim R. McVicar,et al.  Global‐scale regionalization of hydrologic model parameters , 2016 .

[22]  M. Weiler,et al.  Reevaluation of transit time distributions, mean transit times and their relation to catchment topography , 2014 .

[23]  F. Anctil,et al.  Which potential evapotranspiration input for a lumped rainfall-runoff model?. Part 2: Towards a simple and efficient potential evapotranspiration model for rainfall-runoff modelling , 2005 .

[24]  N. J. DE VOS,et al.  Multi-objective performance comparison of an artificial neural network and a conceptual rainfall—runoff model , 2007 .

[25]  J. Dietrich,et al.  Modification of the SWAT model to simulate regional groundwater flow using a multicell aquifer , 2018 .

[26]  Rachel Puechberty,et al.  La refonte du système d'information national pour la gestion et la mise à disposition des données hydrométriques , 2014 .