The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Toward a reliable decomposition of predictive uncertainty in hydrological modeling: Characterizing rainfall errors using conditional simulation
Open accessAbstract
This study explores the decomposition of predictive uncertainty in hydrological modeling into its contributing sources. This is pursued by developing data‐based probability models describing uncertainties in rainfall and runoff data and incorporating them into the Bayesian total error analysis methodology (BATEA). A case study based on the Yzeron catchment (France) and the conceptual rainfall‐runoff model GR4J is presented. It exploits a calibration period where dense rain gauge data are available to characterize the uncertainty in the catchment average rainfall using geostatistical conditional simulation. The inclusion of information about rainfall and runoff data uncertainties overcomes ill‐posedness problems and enables simultaneous estimation of forcing and structural errors as part of the Bayesian inference. This yields more reliable predictions than approaches that ignore or lump different sources of uncertainty in a simplistic way (e.g., standard least squares). It is shown that independently derived data quality estimates are needed to decompose the total uncertainty in the runoff predictions into the individual contributions of rainfall, runoff, and structural errors. In this case study, the total predictive uncertainty appears dominated by structural errors. Although further research is needed to interpret and verify this decomposition, it can provide strategic guidance for investments in environmental data collection and/or modeling improvement. More generally, this study demonstrates the power of the Bayesian paradigm to improve the reliability of environmental modeling using independent estimates of sampling and instrumental data uncertainties.
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
Gelman, A., Carlin, J. B., Stern, H. S., & Rubin, D. B. (2003) · doi:10.1201/9780429258480 · Cited by 27,276
Evensen, G. (1994) · Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans · doi:10.1029/94jc00572 · Cited by 5,371
Bayesian calibration of computer models
Kennedy, M. C., & O'Hagan, A. (2001) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology · doi:10.1111/1467-9868.00294 · Cited by 4,222
Probabilistic Forecasts, Calibration and Sharpness
Gneiting, T., Balabdaoui, F., & Raftery, A. E. (2007) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9868.2007.00587.x · Cited by 1,783
Multi-model ensemble hydrologic prediction using Bayesian model averaging
Duan, Q., Ajami, N. K., Gao, X., & Sorooshian, S. (2007) · Advances in Water Resources · doi:10.1016/j.advwatres.2006.11.014 · Cited by 724
Probabilistic inference for future climate using an ensemble of climate model evaluations.
Rougier, J. (2007) · Climatic Change · doi:10.1007/s10584-006-9156-9 · Cited by 218
Cited by
Benchmarking observational uncertainties for hydrology: rainfall, river discharge and water quality
McMillan, H., Krueger, T., & Freer, J. (2012) · Hydrological Processes · doi:10.1002/hyp.9384 · Cited by 522
Metadata
- Authors
- Renard, B., Kavetski, D., Leblois, E., Thyer, M., Kuczera, G., & Franks, S. W.
- Venue
- Water Resources Research
- Publisher
- American Geophysical Union (AGU)
- Published
- 2011-11
- Volume
- 47
- Issue
- 11
- ISSN
- 0043-1397 (ISSN-L)
- 1944-7973
- OpenAlex
- W1493653825
- Cited by
- 239
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 17.86
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
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.