Summary
Abstract The goal of this commentary is to critically evaluate the use of popular performance metrics in hydrologic modeling. We focus on the Nash‐Sutcliffe Efficiency (NSE) and the Kling‐Gupta Efficiency (KGE) metrics, which are both widely used in hydrologic research and practice around the world. Our specific objectives are: (a) to provide tools that quantify the sampling uncertainty in popular performance metrics; (b) to quantify sampling uncertainty in popular performance metrics across a large sample of catchments; and (c) to prescribe the further research that is, needed to improve the estimation, interpretation, and use of popular performance metrics in hydrologic modeling. Our large‐sample analysis demonstrates that there is substantial sampling uncertainty in the NSE and KGE esti
Dig deeper with Pulse AI.
Pulse AI has read the whole catalogue. Ask about this record, its theme, or how the findings apply to UK farming and policy — every answer cites the underlying studies.