IAG 150 Years pp 257-261 | Cite as

Least-Squares Prediction of Runoff Over Ungauged Basins

Conference paper
Part of the International Association of Geodesy Symposia book series (IAG SYMPOSIA, volume 143)


One of the major concerns of hydrology is to quantify the hydrological cycle of basins e.g. by means of modeling the hydrological interactions. However, current hydrological models are far from perfect. The main challenge of modeling is the poor spatio-temporal coverage of in situ databases, which are declining steadily over the past few decades. Among the hydrological interactions, river runoff is of great importance, as it represents a catchment’s behaviour. In order to deal with the growing lack of in situ runoff data, we estimate river runoff of ungauged basins by least-squares prediction. In this method, runoff is predicted by mapping the runoff characteristics of gauged basins into ungauged ones through statistical correlations of past data. We follow two scenarios to form the covariance matrices out of available past in situ river runoff: (1) at the signal level, and (2) at the residual level after subtracting monthly mean values. Our validation shows that both scenarios are able to capture runoff values with relative errors less than 15 % for 80 % of the 25 catchments under study. We obtain Nash-Sutcliffe coefficients of over 0.4 for about 90 % and of over 0.75 for about 50 % of the catchments under study. We are thus able to avoid the complexity of hydrological modeling and the challenges (e.g. uncertainty) of spaceborne approaches for runoff estimation over ungauged basins.


Least-squares prediction Runoff 


  1. Alsdorf D, Rodríguez E, Lettenmaier DP (2007) Measuring surface water from space. Rev Geophys 45:RG2002. doi:10.1029/2006RG000197 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bjerklie DM, Dingman SL, Vörösmarty CJ, Bolster CH, Congalton RG (2003) Evaluating the potential for measuring river discharge from space. J Hydrol 278(1–4):17–38. doi:10.1016/S0022-1694(03)00129-X CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Fekete BM, Vörösmarty CJ (2007) The current status of global river discharge monitoring and potential new technologies complementing traditional discharge measurements. In: Predictions in Ungauged Basins: PUB Kick-off (Proceedings of the PUB Kick-off meeting held in Brasilia, 20–22 November 2002) IAHS Publication, p 309Google Scholar
  4. Lorenz C, Kunstmann H (2012) The hydrological cycle in three state-of-the-art reanalyses: intercomparison and performance analysis. J Hydrometeorol 13:1397–1420. doi:10.1175/JHM-D-11-088.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Milliman J, Farnsworth K, Jones P, Xu K, Smith L (2008) Climatic and anthropogenic factors affecting river discharge to the global ocean, 1951–2000. Glob Planet Chang 62(3-4):187–194. doi:10.1016/j.gloplacha.2008.03.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Moritz H (1989) Advanced physical geodesy. Wichmann, KarlsruheGoogle Scholar
  7. Nash JE, Sutcliffe JV (1970) River flow forecasting through conceptual models: Part 1. A discussion of principles. J Hydrol 10:282–290. doi:10.1016/0022-1694(70)90255-6 Google Scholar
  8. Sneeuw N, Lorenz C, Tourian MJ, Devaraju B, Kunstmann H, Bárdossy A (2013) Estimating runoff using hydro-geodetic approaches: status and challenges. Surv Geophys 35:1243-1249Google Scholar
  9. Tourian MJ, Sneeuw N, Bárdossy A (2013) A quantile function approach to discharge estimation from satellite altimetry (ENVISAT). Water Resour Res 49:1–13. doi:10.1002/wrcr.20348 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Trenberth KE, Smith L, Qian T, Dai A, Fasullo J (2007) Estimates of the global water budget and its annual cycle using observational and model data. J Hydrometeorol 8:758–769. doi:10.1175/JHM600.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of GeodesyUniversity of StuttgartStuttgartGermany

Personalised recommendations