Exploring Climate Sensitivity in Hydrological Model Calibration

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

See attachment

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

"...as follows X" → according to X

we use "as follows" at the end of a sentence and indicating that the following paragraph will give details (about the thing(s) written before "as follows").

Author Response

We wish to thank the reviewer for the constructive comments sincerely.
The reviewer’s comments and suggestions tremendously improved the manuscript. please find our responses to the reviewer’s comments.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper touches upon a very interesting subject that has been debatable for many long years. Authors have highlighted the issues and conducted the modelling based on four different climate types.

The importance of the climate data types on the parameter estimates obtained during the calibration using a particular climate data type and its application to diverse climate data types has been ably demonstrated in this paper. However, whether the conclusions can be generalised is a question which can be answered only after replication of this work in other river basin with diverse climate in other parts of the world.

Author Response

We wish to thank the reviewer for the constructive comments sincerely.
The reviewer’s comments and suggestions tremendously improved the manuscript. please find our responses to the reviewer’s comments.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 

This paper employs the concept of split-sample calibration method, wherein available streamflow data is partitioned into multiple periods for calibration and validation under distinct climatic conditions. This approach is particularly compelling given the uniqueness of the case study: the East Asia Monsoon Climate. Consequently, I believe that this work is worthy of publication, having considered the following aspects.

It is imperative to acknowledge in the discussion or introduction section that climate models themselves play a crucial role in calibration outcomes, especially in the context of climate change scenarios. Please refer to 'Analysis of high streamflow extremes in climate change studies: how do we calibrate hydrological models? 10.5194/hess-26-3863-2022.'

Another influential factor on model calibration is the presence of human infrastructures. Kindly refer to 'Detailed simulation of storage hydropower systems in large Alpine watersheds' and 'On inclusion of water resource management in earth system models; part 1: problem definition and representation of water demand.'

Please provide a more explicit elucidation of the novelty in your work, be it in methodologies or case study. The phrase 'the performance of climate-condition-dependent model calibration, particularly in the context of the Korean Peninsula's monsoon climate, has been analyzed from the perspectives of model reproducibility and uncertainty' is, in my opinion, insufficient. Are there other hydrological studies examining the hydrological response to the 'Korean Peninsula's monsoon climate'? What is the added value of the present work? How does it differ from 'Stochastic Parsimonious Hydrologic Partitioning Model under East Asia Monsoon Climate and Its Application to Climate Change'?

Support the sentence 'Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) simulation' with relevant references.

There are some typographical errors regarding the indentation of equations: no ';' or ',' and incorrect linking of paragraphs after equations. Please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/authors/layout#_bookmark36.

Could you substantiate the choice of the hydrological model as well as its description with references? For example, 'Stochastic Parsimonious Hydrologic Partitioning Model under East Asia Monsoon Climate and Its Application to Climate Change.'

Support the sentence 'The six parameters of the CHPM were estimated using the Metropolis-Hastings (MH) algorithm, which is one of the algorithms for MCMC sampling' with appropriate references.

I have some reservations regarding the Confidence Intervals (CIs) in Figure 4. Could the authors provide a clearer explanation of the computation of the confidence intervals in yellow?

The CI is not introduced in either the text or the captions.

Author Response

We wish to thank the reviewer for the constructive comments sincerely.
The reviewer’s comments and suggestions tremendously improved the manuscript. please find our responses to the reviewer’s comments.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper is ready to publication, some (really minor) English edition is recommended.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

It is a well written paper, yet some little grammatical issues have been found, they are:

 

L139: Equation → Equations

L158 and L164 as follows Equation → according to Equation

                                                   (or) → by Equation

 

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors  have replied  properly to all my comments. I believe thus that the paper is worth publishing in WATER.