The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A framework for assessing uncertainties in climate change impacts: Low‐flow scenarios for the River Thames, UK
Abstract
A probabilistic framework is presented for combining information from an ensemble of four general circulation models (GCMs), two greenhouse gas emission scenarios, two statistical downscaling techniques, two hydrological model structures, and two sets of hydrological model parameters. GCMs were weighted according to an index of reliability for downscaled effective rainfall, a key determinant of low flows in the River Thames. Hydrological model structures were weighted by performance at reproducing annual low‐flow series. Weights were also assigned to sets of water resource model (CATCHMOD) parameters using the Nash‐Sutcliffe efficiency criterion. Emission scenarios and downscaling methods were unweighted. A Monte Carlo approach was then used to explore components of uncertainty affecting projections for the River Thames by the 2080s. The resulting cumulative distribution functions (CDFs) of low flows were most sensitive to uncertainty in the climate change scenarios and downscaling of different GCMs. Uncertainties due to the hydrological model parameters and emission scenario increase with time but were less important. Abrupt changes in low‐flow CDFs were attributed to uncertainties in statistically downscaled summer rainfall. This was linked to different behavior of atmospheric moisture among the chosen GCMs.
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
Quantification of modelling uncertainties in a large ensemble of climate change simulations.
Murphy, J. M., Sexton, D. M. H., Barnett, D. N., Jones, G. S., Webb, M. J., Collins, M., & Stainforth, D. A. (2004) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature02771 · Cited by 1,655
Probability of regional climate change based on the Reliability Ensemble Averaging (REA) method
Giorgi, F., & Mearns, L. O. (2003) · Geophysical Research Letters · doi:10.1029/2003gl017130 · Cited by 258
Cited by
The implications of projected climate change for freshwater resources and their management
KUNDZEWICZ, Z. W., MATA, L. J., ARNELL, N. W., DÖLL, P., JIMENEZ, B., MILLER, K., OKI, T., ŞEN, Z., & SHIKLOMANOV, I. (2008) · Hydrological Sciences Journal · doi:10.1623/hysj.53.1.3 · Cited by 874
Assessing the impact of climate change on water resources in Iran
Abbaspour, K. C., Faramarzi, M., Ghasemi, S. S., & Yang, H. (2009) · Water Resources Research · doi:10.1029/2008wr007615 · Cited by 608
Murphy, J. M., Booth, B. B. B., Collins, M., Harris, G. R., Sexton, D. M. H., & Webb, M. J. (2007) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences · doi:10.1098/rsta.2007.2077 · Cited by 316
Prudhomme, C., & Davies, H. (2009) · Climatic Change · doi:10.1007/s10584-008-9464-3 · Cited by 313
Review of approaches for selection and ensembling of GCMs
Raju, K. S., & Kumar, D. N. (2020) · Journal of Water and Climate Change · doi:10.2166/wcc.2020.128 · Cited by 215
Metadata
- Authors
- Wilby, R. L., & Harris, I.
- Venue
- Water Resources Research
- Publisher
- American Geophysical Union (AGU)
- Published
- 2006-02
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 2
- ISSN
- 0043-1397 (ISSN-L)
- 1944-7973
- OpenAlex
- W1527805269
- Cited by
- 917
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 39.41
- 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: A framework for assessing uncertainties in climate change impacts: Low‐flow scenarios for the River Thames, UK. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/2005wr004065
- The paper
- Wilby, R. L., & Harris, I. (2006). A framework for assessing uncertainties in climate change impacts: Low‐flow scenarios for the River Thames, UK. Water Resources Research. https://doi.org/10.1029/2005wr004065
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.