We used machine learning (random forests) and a hydrological model to simulate 15 hydrological signatures over 671 catchments in the US. The predictability of the signatures is highly correlated with the smoothness of their spatial pattern, which we quantified using Moran's I. Poorly-predicted signatures vary abruptly in space, are sensitive to streamflow errors and their links to catchment attributes are elusive.
AbstractHydrological signatures are now used for a wide range of purposes, including catchment classification, process exploration and hydrological model calibration. The recent boost in the popularity and number of signatures has however not been accompanied by the development of clear guidance on signature selection. Here we propose that exploring the predictability of signatures in space provides important insights into their drivers, their sensitivity to data uncertainties, and is hence useful for signature selection. We use three complementary approaches to compare and rank 15 commonly-used signatures, which we evaluate in 671 US catchments from the CAMELS data set (Catchment Attributes and MEteorology for Largesample Studies). Firstly, we employ machine learning (random forests) to explore how attributes characterizing the climatic conditions, topography, land cover, soil and geology influence (or not) the signatures. Secondly, we use simulations of a conceptual hydrological model (Sacramento) to benchmark the random forest predictions. Thirdly, we take advantage of the large sample of CAMELS catchments to characterize the spatial auto-correlation (using Moran's I) of the signature field. These three approaches lead to remarkably similar rankings of the signatures. We show i) that signatures with the noisiest spatial pattern tend to be poorly captured by hydrological simulations, ii) that their relationship to catchments attributes are