Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 429

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Assessing the uncertainty in distributed model predictions using observed binary pattern information within GLUE

Aronica, G., Bates, P. D., Horritt, M. S.·2002·Hydrological Processes

Abstract

In this paper we extend the generalized likelihood uncertainty estimation (GLUE) technique to estimate spatially distributed uncertainty in models conditioned against binary pattern data contained in flood inundation maps. Untransformed binary pattern data already have been used within GLUE to estimate domain‐averaged (zero‐dimensional) likelihoods, yet the pattern information embedded within such sources has not been used to estimate distributed uncertainty. Where pattern information has been used to map distributed uncertainty it has been transformed into a continuous function prior to use, which may introduce additional errors. To solve this problem we use here ‘raw’ binary pattern data to define a zero‐dimensional global performance measure for each simulation in a Monte Carlo ensemble. Thereafter, for each pixel of the distributed model we evaluate the probability that this pixel was inundated. This probability is then weighted by the measure of global model performance, thus taking into account how well a given parameter set performs overall. The result is a distributed uncertainty measure mapped over real space. The advantage of the approach is that it both captures distributed uncertainty and contains information on global likelihood that can be used to condition predictions of further events for which observed data are not available. The technique is applied to the problem of flood inundation prediction at two test sites representing different hydrodynamic conditions. In both cases, the method reveals the spatial structure in simulation uncertainty and simultaneously enables mapping of flood probability predicted by the model. Spatially distributed uncertainty analysis is shown to contain information over and above that available from global performance measures. Overall, the paper highlights the different types of information that may be obtained from mappings of model uncertainty over real and n‐dimensional parameter spaces. Copyright © 2002 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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/hyp.398

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.

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

Cited by

See all 429

Metadata

Authors
Aronica, G., Bates, P. D., & Horritt, M. S.
Venue
Hydrological Processes
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2002-02-28
Volume
16
Issue
10
Pages
2001-2016
ISSN
  • 0885-6087 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-1085
OpenAlex
W2089594470
Cited by
429
References
0
FWCI
15.77
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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Assessing the uncertainty in distributed model predictions using observed binary pattern information within GLUE. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/hyp.398
The paper
Aronica, G., Bates, P. D., & Horritt, M. S. (2002). Assessing the uncertainty in distributed model predictions using observed binary pattern information within GLUE. Hydrological Processes. https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.398

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.