Multi-Model Comparison of Hydrologic Simulation Performance Using DWAT, PRMS, and TANK Models

This study compares the streamflow simulation performance of a semi-distributed hydrological model, DWAT (Dynamic Water Resources Assessment Tool), and two conceptual models, PRMS and TANK, across three watersheds in the Republic of Korea representing mountainous (Okdong-gyo), mixed-use (Wonbu-gyo), and urbanized (Daegok-gyo) conditions. All models were calibrated and validated using identical hydroclimatic datasets and evaluation periods to ensure a fair comparison. Model performance was evaluated using nine statistical metrics (R2, NSE, LogNSE, KGE, RMSE, MAE, RE, VE, and RSR), supplemented by low-flow analysis based on a Q90 threshold and non-parametric statistical tests. DWAT exhibited the most stable and highest overall performance across all watersheds, with particularly strong results in the urbanized Daegok-gyo basin (NSE = 0.85, R2 = 0.88). The TANK model performed best in the mixed-use Wonbu-gyo basin (NSE = 0.82, R2 = 0.83), whereas PRMS showed a systematic tendency to underestimate streamflow, especially under high-flow and low-flow conditions. Statistical comparisons using Friedman and post hoc Dunn tests confirmed that performance differences among models were statistically significant (p < 0.001). Overall, the results demonstrate that hydrological model performance strongly depends on watershed characteristics and provide a quantitative and statistically supported basis for selecting appropriate runoff simulation models according to basin type.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Water
Published
2026-01-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/w18020145
Primary Topic
Hydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Multi-Model Comparison of Hydrologic Simulation Performance Using DWAT, PRMS, and TANK Models

H. Y. Kim, Deokhwan Kim, Heechan Han, Wonjin Jang et al.
Water
Hydrology and Watershed Management Studies
article

Multi-Model Comparison of Hydrologic Simulation Performance Using DWAT, PRMS, and TANK Models

H. Y. Kim, Deokhwan Kim, Heechan Han, Wonjin Jang, Hyoung-Sub Shin, Cheolhee Jang
article en

Abstract

This study compares the streamflow simulation performance of a semi-distributed hydrological model, DWAT (Dynamic Water Resources Assessment Tool), and two conceptual models, PRMS and TANK, across three watersheds in the Republic of Korea representing mountainous (Okdong-gyo), mixed-use (Wonbu-gyo), and urbanized (Daegok-gyo) conditions. All models were calibrated and validated using identical hydroclimatic datasets and evaluation periods to ensure a fair comparison. Model performance was evaluated using nine statistical metrics (R2, NSE, LogNSE, KGE, RMSE, MAE, RE, VE, and RSR), supplemented by low-flow analysis based on a Q90 threshold and non-parametric statistical tests. DWAT exhibited the most stable and highest overall performance across all watersheds, with particularly strong results in the urbanized Daegok-gyo basin (NSE = 0.85, R2 = 0.88). The TANK model performed best in the mixed-use Wonbu-gyo basin (NSE = 0.82, R2 = 0.83), whereas PRMS showed a systematic tendency to underestimate streamflow, especially under high-flow and low-flow conditions. Statistical comparisons using Friedman and post hoc Dunn tests confirmed that performance differences among models were statistically significant (p < 0.001). Overall, the results demonstrate that hydrological model performance strongly depends on watershed characteristics and provide a quantitative and statistically supported basis for selecting appropriate runoff simulation models according to basin type.

WaterVol. 18(2)
Inha University (KR), Korea Institute of Civil Engineering and Building Technology (KR)
Korea Environmental Industry and Technology Institute
Sustainable cities and communities
Openalex Percentile: Top 96%
Hydrology and Watershed Management Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.