Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 487

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Dominant flood generating mechanisms across the United States

Open access
Berghuijs, Wouter R., Woods, Ross A., Hutton, Christopher J., Sivapalan, M.·2016·Geophysical Research Letters

Abstract

River flooding can have severe societal, economic, and environmental consequences. However, limited understanding of the regional differences in flood‐generating mechanisms results in poorly understood historical flood trends and uncertain predictions of future flood conditions. Through systematic data analyses of 420 catchments we expose the primary drivers of flooding across the contiguous United States. This is achieved by exploring which flood‐generating processes control the seasonality and magnitude of maximum annual flows. The regional patterns of seasonality and interannual variabilities of maximum annual flows are, in general, poorly explained by rainfall characteristics alone. For most catchments soil moisture dependent precipitation excess, snowmelt, and rain‐on‐snow events are found to be much better predictors of the flooding responses. The continental‐scale classification of dominant flood‐generating processes we generate here emphasizes the disparity in timing and variability between extreme rainfall and flooding and can assist predictions of flooding and flood risk within the continental U.S.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/2016gl068070

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 487

Metadata

Authors
Berghuijs, W. R., Woods, R. A., Hutton, C. J., & Sivapalan, M.
Venue
Geophysical Research Letters
Published
2016-05-06
Volume
43
Issue
9
Pages
4382-4390
ISSN
  • 0094-8276 (ISSN-L)
  • 1944-8007
OpenAlex
W2277281297
Cited by
487
References
3
FWCI
23.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.