The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Dynamically dimensioned search algorithm for computationally efficient watershed model calibration
Abstract
A new global optimization algorithm, dynamically dimensioned search (DDS), is introduced for automatic calibration of watershed simulation models. DDS is designed for calibration problems with many parameters, requires no algorithm parameter tuning, and automatically scales the search to find good solutions within the maximum number of user‐specified function (or model) evaluations. As a result, DDS is ideally suited for computationally expensive optimization problems such as distributed watershed model calibration. DDS performance is compared to the shuffled complex evolution (SCE) algorithm for multiple optimization test functions as well as real and synthetic SWAT2000 model automatic calibration formulations. Algorithms are compared for optimization problems ranging from 6 to 30 dimensions, and each problem is solved in 1000 to 10,000 total function evaluations per optimization trial. Results are presented so that future modelers can assess algorithm performance at a computational scale relevant to their modeling case study. In all four of the computationally expensive real SWAT2000 calibration formulations considered here (14, 14, 26, and 30 calibration parameters), results show DDS to be more efficient and effective than SCE. In two cases, DDS requires only 15–20% of the number of model evaluations used by SCE in order to find equally good values of the objective function. Overall, the results also show that DDS rapidly converges to good calibration solutions and easily avoids poor local optima. The simplicity of the DDS algorithm allows for easy recoding and subsequent adoption into any watershed modeling application framework.
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
A Simplex Method for Function Minimization
Nelder, J. A., & Mead, R. (1965) · The Computer Journal · doi:10.1093/comjnl/7.4.308 · Cited by 28,905
No free lunch theorems for optimization
Wolpert, D. H., & Macready, W. G. (1997) · IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation · doi:10.1109/4235.585893 · Cited by 14,237
LARGE AREA HYDROLOGIC MODELING AND ASSESSMENT PART I: MODEL DEVELOPMENT 1
Arnold, J. G., Srinivasan, R., Muttiah, R. S., & Williams, J. R. (1998) · JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association · doi:10.1111/j.1752-1688.1998.tb05961.x · Cited by 7,945
Cited by
Gupta, H. V., Kling, H., Yilmaz, K. K., & Martinez, G. F. (2009) · Journal of Hydrology · doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.08.003 · Cited by 6,758
Maier, H. R., Kapelan, Z., Kasprzyk, J., Kollat, J., Matott, L. S., Cunha, M. C., Dandy, G. C., Gibbs, M. S., Keedwell, E., Marchi, A., et al. (2014) · Environmental Modelling & Software · doi:10.1016/j.envsoft.2014.09.013 · Cited by 657
Appraisal of the generalized likelihood uncertainty estimation (GLUE) method
Stedinger, J. R., Vogel, R. M., Lee, S. U., & Batchelder, R. (2008) · Water Resources Research · doi:10.1029/2008wr006822 · Cited by 386
Kumar, R., Samaniego, L., & Attinger, S. (2013) · Water Resources Research · doi:10.1029/2012wr012195 · Cited by 354
Dembélé, M., Hrachowitz, M., Savenije, H. H. G., Mariéthoz, G., & Schaefli, B. (2020) · Water Resources Research · doi:10.1029/2019wr026085 · Cited by 253
Metadata
- Authors
- Tolson, B. A., & Shoemaker, C. A.
- Venue
- Water Resources Research
- Publisher
- American Geophysical Union (AGU)
- Published
- 2007-01
- Volume
- 43
- Issue
- 1
- ISSN
- 0043-1397 (ISSN-L)
- 1944-7973
- OpenAlex
- W2126171847
- Cited by
- 896
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 18.38
- 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: Dynamically dimensioned search algorithm for computationally efficient watershed model calibration. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/2005wr004723
- The paper
- Tolson, B. A., & Shoemaker, C. A. (2007). Dynamically dimensioned search algorithm for computationally efficient watershed model calibration. Water Resources Research. https://doi.org/10.1029/2005wr004723
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.