Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 391

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 65 of the 65 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Global Sensitivity Analysis of environmental models: Convergence and validation

Open access
Sarrazin, Fanny, Pianosi, Francesca, Wagener, Thorsten·2016·Environmental Modelling & Software
DOI 10.1016/j.envsoft.2016.02.005
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

We address two critical choices in Global Sensitivity Analysis (GSA): the choice of the sample size and of the threshold for the identification of insensitive input factors. Guidance to assist users with those two choices is still insufficient. We aim at filling this gap. Firstly, we define criteria to quantify the convergence of sensitivity indices, of ranking and of screening, based on a bootstrap approach. Secondly, we investigate the screening threshold with a quantitative validation procedure for screening results. We apply the proposed methodologies to three hydrological models with varying complexity utilizing three widely-used GSA methods (RSA, Morris, Sobol’). We demonstrate that convergence of screening and ranking can be reached before sensitivity estimates stabilize. Convergence dynamics appear to be case-dependent, which suggests that “fit-for-all” rules for sample sizes should not be used. Other modellers can easily adopt our criteria and procedures for a wide range of GSA methods and cases.

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 · 10.1016/j.envsoft.2016.02.005

Cites

65 of 65 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 391

Metadata

Authors
Sarrazin, F., Pianosi, F., & Wagener, T.
Venue
Environmental Modelling & Software
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-05
Volume
79
Pages
135-152
ISSN
1364-8152 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.envsoft.2016.02.005
OpenAlex
W2341416175
Cited by
391
References
65
FWCI
30.25
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

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.