The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Uncertainty in hydrologic modeling: Toward an integrated data assimilation framework
Open accessAbstract
Despite significant recent developments in computational power and distributed hydrologic modeling, the issue of how to adequately address the uncertainty associated with hydrological predictions remains a critical and challenging one. This issue needs to be properly addressed for hydrological modeling to realize its maximum practical potential in environmental decision‐making processes. Arguably, the key to properly addressing hydrologic uncertainty is to understand, quantify, and reduce uncertainty involved in hydrologic modeling in a cohesive, systematic manner. Although general principles and techniques on addressing hydrologic uncertainty are emerging in the literature, there exist no well‐accepted guidelines about how to actually implement these principles and techniques in various hydrologic settings in an integrated manner. This paper reviews, in relevant detail, the common data assimilation methods that have been used in hydrologic modeling to address problems of state estimation, parameter estimation, and system identification. In particular, the paper discusses concepts, methods, and issues involved in hydrologic data assimilation from a systems perspective. An integrated hierarchical framework is proposed for pursuing hydrologic data assimilation in several progressive steps to maximally reduce uncertainty in hydrologic predictions.
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 New Approach to Linear Filtering and Prediction Problems
Kalman, R. E. (1960) · Journal of Basic Engineering · doi:10.1115/1.3662552 · Cited by 31,751
Evensen, G. (1994) · Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans · doi:10.1029/94jc00572 · Cited by 5,371
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×
“[41] Along the same line of reasoning, a coherent mechanism for handling structural uncertainty is the concept of Bayesian model averaging (BMA) [Hoeting et al., 1999].”
Beven, K., & Freer, J. (2001) · Journal of Hydrology · doi:10.1016/s0022-1694(01)00421-8 · Cited by 2,189
Doblas-Reyes, F. J., Hagedorn, R., & Palmer, T. N. (2005) · Tellus A: Dynamic Meteorology and Oceanography · doi:10.3402/tellusa.v57i3.14658 · Cited by 340
Cited by
Hydrological cycle and water resources in a changing world: A review
Yang, D., Yang, Y., & Xia, J. (2021) · Geography and Sustainability · doi:10.1016/j.geosus.2021.05.003 · Cited by 518
Equifinality of formal (DREAM) and informal (GLUE) Bayesian approaches in hydrologic modeling?
Vrugt, J. A., ter Braak, C. J. F., Gupta, H. V., & Robinson, B. A. (2009) · Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment · doi:10.1007/s00477-008-0274-y · Cited by 455
Self-citationPhysically based modeling in catchment hydrology at 50: Survey and outlook
Paniconi, C., & Putti, M. (2015) · Water Resources Research · doi:10.1002/2015wr017780 · Cited by 374
Salas, J. D., Govindaraju, R. S., Anderson, M., Arabi, M., Francés, F., Suarez, W., Lavado-Casimiro, W. S., & Green, T. R. (2014) · Modern Water Resources Engineering · doi:10.1007/978-1-62703-595-8_1 · Cited by 290
Huynh, N. N. T., Garambois, P.-A., Renard, B., Colleoni, F., Monnier, J., & Roux, H. (2025) · Hydrology and Earth System Sciences · doi:10.5194/hess-29-3589-2025 · Cited by 38
Metadata
- Authors
- Liu, Y., & Gupta, H. V.
- Venue
- Water Resources Research
- Publisher
- American Geophysical Union (AGU)
- Published
- 2007-07
- Volume
- 43
- Issue
- 7
- ISSN
- 0043-1397 (ISSN-L)
- 1944-7973
- OpenAlex
- W2117319840
- Cited by
- 856
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 26.37
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Uncertainty in hydrologic modeling: Toward an integrated data assimilation framework. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/2006wr005756
- The paper
- Liu, Y., & Gupta, H. V. (2007). Uncertainty in hydrologic modeling: Toward an integrated data assimilation framework. Water Resources Research. https://doi.org/10.1029/2006wr005756
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.