The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Pursuing the method of multiple working hypotheses for hydrological modeling
Open accessAbstract
Ambiguities in the representation of environmental processes have manifested themselves in a plethora of hydrological models, differing in almost every aspect of their conceptualization and implementation. The current overabundance of models is symptomatic of an insufficient scientific understanding of environmental dynamics at the catchment scale, which can be attributed to difficulties in measuring and representing the heterogeneity encountered in natural systems. This commentary advocates using the method of multiple working hypotheses for systematic and stringent testing of model alternatives in hydrology. We discuss how the multiple‐hypothesis approach provides the flexibility to formulate alternative representations (hypotheses) describing both individual processes and the overall system. When combined with incisive diagnostics to scrutinize multiple model representations against observed data, this provides hydrologists with a powerful and systematic approach for model development and improvement. Multiple‐hypothesis frameworks also support a broader coverage of the model hypothesis space and hence improve the quantification of predictive uncertainty arising from system and component nonidentifiabilities. As part of discussing the advantages and limitations of multiple‐hypothesis frameworks, we critically review major contemporary challenges in hydrological hypothesis‐testing, including exploiting different types of data to investigate the fidelity of alternative process representations, accounting for model structure ambiguities arising from major uncertainties in environmental data, quantifying regional differences in dominant hydrological processes, and the grander challenge of understanding the self‐organization and optimality principles that may functionally explain and describe the heterogeneities evident in most environmental systems. We assess recent progress in these research directions, and how new advances are possible using multiple‐hypothesis methodologies.
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
BEVEN, K. J., & KIRKBY, M. J. (1979) · Hydrological Sciences Bulletin · doi:10.1080/02626667909491834 · Cited by 6,670
Inverse Problem Theory and Methods for Model Parameter Estimation
Tarantola, A. (2005) · doi:10.1137/1.9780898717921 · Cited by 6,585
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
Beven, K., & Freer, J. (2001) · Journal of Hydrology · doi:10.1016/s0022-1694(01)00421-8 · Cited by 2,189
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
Cited by
Ritter, A., & Muñoz-Carpena, R. (2013) · Journal of Hydrology · doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.12.004 · Cited by 991
What Role Does Hydrological Science Play in the Age of Machine Learning?
Nearing, G. S., Kratzert, F., Sampson, A. K., Pelissier, C. S., Klotz, D., Frame, J. M., Prieto, C., & Gupta, H. V. (2021) · Water Resources Research · doi:10.1029/2020wr028091 · Cited by 894
Global hydrology 2015: State, trends, and directions
Bierkens, M. F. P. (2015) · Water Resources Research · doi:10.1002/2015wr017173 · Cited by 493
Towards a comprehensive assessment of model structural adequacy
Gupta, H. V., Clark, M. P., Vrugt, J. A., Abramowitz, G., & Ye, M. (2012) · Water Resources Research · doi:10.1029/2011wr011044 · Cited by 466
Self-citationMcDonnell, J. J., & Beven, K. (2014) · Water Resources Research · doi:10.1002/2013wr015141 · Cited by 462
Metadata
- Authors
- Clark, M. P., Kavetski, D., & Fenicia, F.
- Venue
- Water Resources Research
- Publisher
- American Geophysical Union (AGU)
- Published
- 2011-09
- Volume
- 47
- Issue
- 9
- ISSN
- 0043-1397 (ISSN-L)
- 1944-7973
- OpenAlex
- W1537396274
- Cited by
- 594
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 26.18
- 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: Pursuing the method of multiple working hypotheses for hydrological modeling. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/2010wr009827
- The paper
- Clark, M. P., Kavetski, D., & Fenicia, F. (2011). Pursuing the method of multiple working hypotheses for hydrological modeling. Water Resources Research. https://doi.org/10.1029/2010wr009827
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.