The DOI matches its Crossref record; 65 of the 65 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
An overview of methods to evaluate uncertainty of deterministic models in decision support
Open accessAbstract
There is an increasing need for environmental management advice that is wide-scoped, covering various interlinked policies, and realistic about the uncertainties related to the possible management actions. To achieve this, efficient decision support integrates the results of pre-existing models. Many environmental models are deterministic, but the uncertainty of their outcomes needs to be estimated when they are utilized for decision support. We review various methods that have been or could be applied to evaluate the uncertainty related to deterministic models' outputs. We cover expert judgement, model emulation, sensitivity analysis, temporal and spatial variability in the model outputs, the use of multiple models, and statistical approaches, and evaluate when these methods are appropriate and what must be taken into account when utilizing them. The best way to evaluate the uncertainty depends on the definitions of the source models and the amount and quality of information available to the modeller.
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
Cites
Dilemmas in a general theory of planning
Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973) · Policy Sciences · doi:10.1007/bf01405730 · Cited by 16,338
Factorial Sampling Plans for Preliminary Computational Experiments
Morris, M. D. (1991) · Technometrics · doi:10.1080/00401706.1991.10484804 · Cited by 4,943
Bayesian calibration of computer models
Kennedy, M. C., & O'Hagan, A. (2001) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology · doi:10.1111/1467-9868.00294 · Cited by 4,222
Hoeting, J. A., Madigan, D., Raftery, A. E., & Volinsky, C. T. (1999) · Statistical Science · doi:10.1214/ss/1009212519 · Cited by 4,118 · cited 1×
“Bayesian model averaging (Hoeting et al., 1999) can be used to combine and weigh several Bayesian models using their posterior probability as the weighting factor.”
Saltelli, A., Annoni, P., Azzini, I., Campolongo, F., Ratto, M., & Tarantola, S. (2010) · Computer Physics Communications · doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2009.09.018 · Cited by 3,623
Defining Uncertainty: A Conceptual Basis for Uncertainty Management in Model-Based Decision Support
Walker, W. E., Harremoës, P., Rotmans, J., van der Sluijs, J. P., van Asselt, M. B. A., Janssen, P., & Krayer von Krauss, M. P. (2003) · Integrated Assessment · doi:10.1076/iaij.4.1.5.16466 · Cited by 2,067
An effective screening design for sensitivity analysis of large models
Campolongo, F., Cariboni, J., & Saltelli, A. (2007) · Environmental Modelling & Software · doi:10.1016/j.envsoft.2006.10.004 · Cited by 2,011
Using Bayesian model averaging to calibrate forecast ensembles.
Raftery, A. E., Gneiting, T., Balabdaoui, F., & Polakowski, M. (2005) · Monthly Weather Review · doi:10.1175/mwr2906.1 · Cited by 1,915
The use of the multi-model ensemble in probabilistic climate projections
Tebaldi, C., & Knutti, R. (2007) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences · doi:10.1098/rsta.2007.2076 · Cited by 1,862
The ecological detective: confronting models with data
(1997) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.35-1501 · Cited by 1,726
Cited by
A survey on missing data in machine learning
Emmanuel, T., Maupong, T., Mpoeleng, D., Semong, T., Mphago, B., & Tabona, O. (2021) · Journal of Big Data · doi:10.1186/s40537-021-00516-9 · Cited by 1,067
Kreps, S. E., & Kriner, D. L. (2020) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.abd4563 · Cited by 328
“Models, therefore, are not “true/false but better/worse, and the possible discrepancy regarding the problem or its parts can have several plausible explanations” (5).”
BackgroundSexton, J., Everingham, Y. L., & Inman-Bamber, G. (2017) · European Journal of Agronomy · doi:10.1016/j.eja.2015.11.009 · Cited by 53
A Bayesian Belief Network to assess rate of changes in coral reef ecosystems
Franco, C., Hepburn, L. A., Smith, D. J., Nimrod, S., & Tucker, A. (2016) · Environmental Modelling & Software · doi:10.1016/j.envsoft.2016.02.029 · Cited by 25
Metadata
- Authors
- Uusitalo, L., Lehikoinen, A., Helle, I., & Myrberg, K.
- Venue
- Environmental Modelling & Software
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2015-01
- Volume
- 63
- Pages
- 24-31
- ISSN
- 1364-8152 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2075966418
- Cited by
- 538
- References
- 65
- FWCI
- 28.51
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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: An overview of methods to evaluate uncertainty of deterministic models in decision support. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.envsoft.2014.09.017
- The paper
- Uusitalo, L., Lehikoinen, A., Helle, I., & Myrberg, K. (2015). An overview of methods to evaluate uncertainty of deterministic models in decision support. Environmental Modelling & Software. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2014.09.017
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.
