The National Water Model (NWM) is a key tool for flood forecasting and planning and water management. Key challenges facing NWM include calibration and parameter regionalization when confronted with big data. We present two novel versions of high-resolution (~37 km2) differentiable models (a type of physics-informed machine learning): one with implicit, unit-hydrograph-style routing and another with explicit Muskingum-Cunge routing in the river network. The former predicts streamflow at basin outlets whereas the latter presents a discretized product that seamlessly covers rivers in the conterminous United States (CONUS). Both versions used neural networks to provide multiscale parameterization and process-based equations to provide structural backbone, trained them together (“end-to-end”) on 2,807 basins across CONUS, and evaluated them on 4,997 basins. Both versions show the great potential to elevate future NWMs for extensively calibrated as well as ungauged sites: the median daily Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE) of all 4,997 basins is improved to around 0.68 from 0.49 of NWM3.0. As they resolve heterogeneity, both greatly improved simulations in the western CONUS and also in the Prairie Pothole Region, a long-standing modeling challenge. The Muskingum-Cunge version further improved performance for basins >10000 km2. Overall, our results show how neural-network-based parameterizations can improve NWM performance for providing operational flood predictions while maintaining interpretability and multivariate outputs. We provide a CONUS-scale hydrologic dataset for further evaluation and use. The modeling system supports the Basic Model Interface (BMI), which allows seamless integration with the next-generation NWM.

The notion of convergent and transdisciplinary integration, which is about braiding together different knowledge systems, is becoming the mantra of numerous initiatives aimed at tackling pressing water challenges. Yet, the transition from rhetoric to actual implementation is impeded by incongruence in semantics, methodologies, and discourse among disciplinary scientists and societal actors. This paper confronts these disciplinary barriers by advocating a synthesis of existing and missing links across the frontiers distinguishing hydrology from engineering, the social sciences and economics, Indigenous and place-based knowledge, and studies of other interconnected natural systems such as the atmosphere, cryosphere, and ecosphere. Specifically, we embrace ‘integrated modeling’, in both quantitative and qualitative senses, as a vital exploratory instrument to advance such integration, providing a means to navigate complexity and manage the uncertainty associated with understanding, diagnosing, predicting, and governing human-water systems. While there are, arguably, no bounds to the pursuit of inclusivity in representing the spectrum of natural and human processes around water resources, we advocate that integrated modeling can provide a focused approach to delineating the scope of integration, through the lens of three fundamental questions: a) What is the modeling ‘purpose’? b) What constitutes a sound ‘boundary judgment’? and c) What are the ‘critical uncertainties’ and how do they propagate through interconnected subsystems? More broadly, we call for investigating what constitutes warranted ‘systems complexity’, as opposed to unjustified ‘computational complexity’ when representing complex natural and human-natural systems, with particular attention to interdependencies and feedbacks, nonlinear dynamics and thresholds, hysteresis, time lags, and legacy effects.

not-yet-known not-yet-known not-yet-known unknown Land surface models (LSMs) are used to simulate water and energy fluxes between the land surface and atmosphere. These simulations are useful for water resources management, drought and flood prediction, and numerical climate/weather prediction. However, the usefulness of LSMs are dependent by their ability to reproduce states and fluxes realistically. Accurate measurements of water storage are useful to calibrate and validate LSMs outputs. Geological Weighing Lysimeters (GWLs) are instruments that can provide field-scale estimates of integrated total water storage within a soil profile. We use field estimates of total water storage and subsurface storage to critically evaluate two different land surface models: the Modélisation Environnementale communautaire - Surface Hydrology (MESH) which uses the Canadian Land Surface Scheme (CLASS), and the Structure for Unifying Multiple Modeling Alternatives: (SUMMA). These models have differences in how the processes and properties of the land surface are represented. We attempted to parameterize each model in an equivalent manner, to minimize model differences. Both models were able to reproduce observations of total water storage and subsurface storage reasonably well. However, there were inconsistencies in the simulated timing of snowmelt; depth of soil freezing; total evapotranspiration; partitioning of evaporation between soil evaporation and evaporation of intercepted water; and soil drainage. No one model emerged as better overall, though each model had specific strengths and weaknesses that we describe. Insights from this study can be used to improve model physics and performance.