The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Why continuous simulation? The role of antecedent moisture in design flood estimation
Open accessAbstract
Continuous simulation for design flood estimation is increasingly becoming a viable alternative to traditional event‐based methods. The advantage of continuous simulation approaches is that the catchment moisture state prior to the flood‐producing rainfall event is implicitly incorporated within the modeling framework, provided the model has been calibrated and validated to produce reasonable simulations. This contrasts with event‐based models in which both information about the expected sequence of rainfall and evaporation preceding the flood‐producing rainfall event, as well as catchment storage and infiltration properties, are commonly pooled together into a single set of “loss” parameters which require adjustment through the process of calibration. To identify the importance of accounting for antecedent moisture in flood modeling, this paper uses a continuous rainfall‐runoff model calibrated to 45 catchments in the Murray‐Darling Basin in Australia. Flood peaks derived using the historical daily rainfall record are compared with those derived using resampled daily rainfall, for which the sequencing of wet and dry days preceding the heavy rainfall event is removed. The analysis shows that there is a consistent underestimation of the design flood events when antecedent moisture is not properly simulated, which can be as much as 30% when only 1 or 2 days of antecedent rainfall are considered, compared to 5% when this is extended to 60 days of prior rainfall. These results show that, in general, it is necessary to consider both short‐term memory in rainfall associated with synoptic scale dependence, as well as longer‐term memory at seasonal or longer time scale variability in order to obtain accurate design flood estimates.
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
Smoothing and Differentiation of Data by Simplified Least Squares Procedures.
Savitzky, A., & Golay, M. J. E. (1964) · Analytical Chemistry · doi:10.1021/ac60214a047 · Cited by 21,904
Soil moisture memory and West African monsoon predictability: Artefact or reality?
Douville, H., Conil, S., Tyteca, S., & Voldoire, A. (2007) · Climate Dynamics · doi:10.1007/s00382-006-0207-8 · Cited by 60
Cited by
Future climate risk from compound events
Zscheischler, J., Westra, S., van den Hurk, B. J. J. M., Seneviratne, S. I., Ward, P. J., Pitman, A., AghaKouchak, A., Bresch, D. N., Leonard, M., Wahl, T., et al. (2018) · Nature Climate Change · doi:10.1038/s41558-018-0156-3 · Cited by 2,527
Self-citationWestra, S., Fowler, H. J., Evans, J. P., Alexander, L. V., Berg, P., Johnson, F., Kendon, E. J., Lenderink, G., & Roberts, N. M. (2014) · Reviews of Geophysics · doi:10.1002/2014rg000464 · Cited by 1,533
Self-citationA compound event framework for understanding extreme impacts
Leonard, M., Westra, S., Phatak, A., Lambert, M., van den Hurk, B., McInnes, K., Risbey, J., Schuster, S., Jakob, D., & Stafford‐Smith, M. (2014) · WIREs Climate Change · doi:10.1002/wcc.252 · Cited by 869
Self-citationIf Precipitation Extremes Are Increasing, Why Aren't Floods?
Sharma, A., Wasko, C., & Lettenmaier, D. P. (2018) · Water Resources Research · doi:10.1029/2018wr023749 · Cited by 528
Self-citationBevacqua, E., Maraun, D., Hobæk Haff, I., Widmann, M., & Vrac, M. (2017) · Hydrology and Earth System Sciences · doi:10.5194/hess-21-2701-2017 · Cited by 373
Metadata
- Authors
- Pathiraja, S., Westra, S., & Sharma, A.
- Venue
- Water Resources Research
- Publisher
- American Geophysical Union (AGU)
- Published
- 2012-06
- Volume
- 48
- Issue
- 6
- ISSN
- 0043-1397 (ISSN-L)
- 1944-7973
- OpenAlex
- W2158197749
- Cited by
- 171
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 7.27
- 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: Why continuous simulation? The role of antecedent moisture in design flood estimation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/2011wr010997
- The paper
- Pathiraja, S., Westra, S., & Sharma, A. (2012). Why continuous simulation? The role of antecedent moisture in design flood estimation. Water Resources Research. https://doi.org/10.1029/2011wr010997
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.