The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Characterization of watershed model behavior across a hydroclimatic gradient
Open accessAbstract
A fundamental tradeoff exists in watershed modeling between a model's flexibility for representing watersheds with different characteristics versus its potential for overparameterization. This study uses global sensitivity analysis to investigate how a commonly used intermediate‐complexity model, the Sacramento Soil Moisture Accounting Model (SAC‐SMA), represents a wide range of watersheds with diverse physical and hydroclimatic characteristics. The analysis aims to establish a detailed understanding of model behavior across watersheds and time periods with the ultimate objective to guide model calibration and evaluation studies. Sobol's sensitivity analysis is used to evaluate the SAC‐SMA in 12 Model Parameter Estimation Experiment (MOPEX) watersheds in the US. The watersheds span a wide hydroclimatic gradient from arid to humid systems. Four evaluation metrics reflecting base flows, midrange flows, peak flows, and long‐term water balance were used to comprehensively characterize trends in sensitivity and model behavior. Results show significant variation in parameter sensitivities that are correlated with the hydroclimatic characteristics of the watersheds and time periods analyzed. The sensitivity patterns are consistent with the expected dominant processes and demonstrate the need for moderate model complexity to represent different hydroclimatic regimes. The analysis reveals that the primary model controls for some aspects of the simulated hydrograph are different from those typically assumed for the SAC‐SMA. Results also show that between 6 and 10 parameters are regularly identifiable from daily hydrologic data, which is about twice the range that is often assumed (i.e., 3 to 5). Synthesized results provide comprehensive SAC‐SMA calibration guidance, demonstrate the flexibility of the model for representing multiple hydroclimatic regimes, and highlight the great difficulty in generalizing model behavior across watersheds.
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
Global sensitivity indices for nonlinear mathematical models and their monte carlo estimates
Sobol′, I. M. (2001) · Mathematics and Computers in Simulation · doi:10.1016/s0378-4754(00)00270-6 · Cited by 6,389
On the distribution of points in a cube and the approximate evaluation of integrals
Sobol', I. M. (1967) · USSR Computational Mathematics and Mathematical Physics · doi:10.1016/0041-5553(67)90144-9 · Cited by 2,975
A Quantitative Model-Independent Method for Global Sensitivity Analysis of Model Output
Saltelli, A., Tarantola, S., & Chan, K. P.-S. (1999) · Technometrics · doi:10.1080/00401706.1999.10485594 · Cited by 2,275
Making best use of model evaluations to compute sensitivity indices
Saltelli, A. (2002) · Computer Physics Communications · doi:10.1016/s0010-4655(02)00280-1 · Cited by 2,228
Cited by
Sensitivity and identifiability of stream flow generation parameters of the SWAT model
Cibin, R., Sudheer, K. P., & Chaubey, I. (2010) · Hydrological Processes · doi:10.1002/hyp.7568 · Cited by 309
Sensitivity analysis methods in the biomedical sciences
Qian, G., & Mahdi, A. (2020) · Mathematical Biosciences · doi:10.1016/j.mbs.2020.108306 · Cited by 169
Metadata
- Authors
- van Werkhoven, K., Wagener, T., Reed, P., & Tang, Y.
- Venue
- Water Resources Research
- Publisher
- American Geophysical Union (AGU)
- Published
- 2008-01
- Volume
- 44
- Issue
- 1
- ISSN
- 0043-1397 (ISSN-L)
- 1944-7973
- OpenAlex
- W1826246963
- Cited by
- 217
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 15.39
- 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: Characterization of watershed model behavior across a hydroclimatic gradient. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/2007wr006271
- The paper
- van Werkhoven, K., Wagener, T., Reed, P., & Tang, Y. (2008). Characterization of watershed model behavior across a hydroclimatic gradient. Water Resources Research. https://doi.org/10.1029/2007wr006271
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.