The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Predicting floodplain inundation: raster‐based modelling versus the finite‐element approach
Abstract
We compare two approaches to modelling floodplain inundation: a raster‐based approach, which uses a relatively simple process representation, with channel flows being resolved separately from the floodplain using either a kinematic or diffusive wave approximation, and a finite‐element hydraulic model aiming to solve the full two‐dimensional shallow‐water equations. A flood event on a short (c. 4 km) reach of the upper River Thames in the UK is simulated, the models being validated against inundation extent as determined from satellite synthetic aperture radar (SAR) imagery. The unconstrained friction parameters are found through a calibration procedure, where a measure of fit between predicted and observed shorelines is maximized. The raster and finite‐element models offer similar levels of performance, both classifying approximately 84% of the model domain correctly, compared with 65% for a simple planar prediction of water surface elevation. Further discrimination between models is not possible given the errors in the validation data. The simple raster‐based model is shown to have considerable advantages in terms of producing a straightforward calibration process, and being robust with respect to channel specification. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
Bates, P. D., Wilson, M. D., Horritt, M. S., Mason, D. C., Holden, N., & Currie, A. (2006) · Journal of Hydrology · doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2005.12.028 · Cited by 185
Self-citationAn Operational Method for Flood Directive Implementation in Ungauged Urban Areas
Papaioannou, G., Efstratiadis, A., Vasiliades, L., Loukas, A., Papalexiou, S. M., Koukouvinos, A., Tsoukalas, I., & Kossieris, P. (2018) · Hydrology · doi:10.3390/hydrology5020024 · Cited by 147
Metadata
- Authors
- Horritt, M. S., & Bates, P. D.
- Venue
- Hydrological Processes
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2001-03-26
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 825-842
- ISSN
- 0885-6087 (ISSN-L)
- 1099-1085
- OpenAlex
- W2118805595
- Cited by
- 340
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 9.95
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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.