The objective of the study is to verify a hypothesis that a hydrological model, which successfully passed a comprehensive evaluation test (CE-test), is more suitable for climate impact study than that which failed the test. In our study, the CE-test is a specially designed model evaluation procedure, including a set of enhanced tests of model performance and robustness. The hypothesis verification is carried out with two models, ECOMAG and SWAP, which are applied for the Lena and Mackenzie River basins. The following three versions of every model are compared: (1) version A with a priori assigned parameters (without any calibration); (2) version B calibrated against streamflow observations at the basin outlets only, and (3) version C calibrated against streamflow observations at several gauges within the basins. We found that the B and C versions were successful in passing the CE-test, while the A versions failed the test. The C versions performed better than the B versions, especially at the monthly time scale. Then, all model versions were forced by global climate model (GCM) ensemble data to simulate flow projections for the twenty-first century and assess the projection uncertainty. Summarizing the results, we found that the differences in projections (in terms of mean annual changes in discharge and their uncertainties) between A version and two other versions were nearly three times larger than the differences between the B and C versions. Thus, the CE-test results together with the estimated differences in projections give us reason to conclude that the successful comprehensive evaluation of a model increases its confidence and suitability for impact assessment.

中文翻译：

---

成功的综合评估是否会增加对用于气候影响评估的水文模型的信心？

该研究的目的是验证一个假设，即成功通过综合评估测试（CE 测试）的水文模型比未通过测试的模型更适合气候影响研究。在我们的研究中，CE 测试是一个专门设计的模型评估程序，包括一组模型性能和稳健性的增强测试。假设验证是通过两个模型进行的，ECOMAG 和 SWAP，它们适用于 Lena 和 Mackenzie 河流域。比较每个模型的以下三个版本： (1) 版本 A 具有先验分配的参数（没有任何校准）；(2) 版本 B 仅针对流域出口处的流量观测进行校准，以及 (3) 版本 C 对流域内多个仪表的流量观测进行了校准。我们发现 B 和 C 版本成功通过了 CE 测试，而 A 版本未通过测试。C 版本的表现优于 B 版本，尤其是在每月时间尺度上。然后，所有模型版本都由全球气候模型 (GCM) 集合数据强制模拟 21 世纪的流量预测并评估预测的不确定性。总结结果，我们发现 A 版本和其他两个版本之间的预测差异（就排放量的年均变化及其不确定性而言）几乎是 B 和 C 版本之间差异的三倍。因此，