The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS, CALIBRATION, AND VALIDATIONS FOR A MULTISITE AND MULTIVARIABLE SWAT MODEL
Abstract
The ability of a watershed model to mimic specified watershed processes is assessed through the calibration and validation process. The Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) watershed model was implemented in the Beaver Reservoir Watershed of Northwest Arkansas. The objectives were to: (1) provide detailed information on calibrating and applying a multisite and multivariable SWAT model; (2) conduct sensitivity analysis; and (3) perform calibration and validation at three different sites for flow, sediment, total phosphorus (TP), and nitrate-nitrogen (NO3-N) plus nitrite-nitrogen (NO2-N). Relative sensitivity analysis was conducted to identify parameters that most influenced predicted flow, sediment, and nutrient model outputs. A multi objective function was defined that consisted of optimizing three statistics: percent relative error (RE), Nash-Sutcliffe Coefficient (RNS2), and coefficient of determination (R2). This function was used to successfully calibrate and validate a SWAT model of Beaver Reservoir Watershed at multi-sites while considering multivariables. Calibration and validation of the model is a key factor in reducing uncertainty and increasing user confidence in its predictive abilities, which makes the application of the model effective. Information on calibration and validation of multisite, multivariable SWAT models has been provided to assist watershed modelers in developing their models to achieve watershed management goals.
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
LARGE AREA HYDROLOGIC MODELING AND ASSESSMENT PART I: MODEL DEVELOPMENT 1
Arnold, J. G., Srinivasan, R., Muttiah, R. S., & Williams, J. R. (1998) · JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association · doi:10.1111/j.1752-1688.1998.tb05961.x · Cited by 7,945
Cited by
SWAT: Model Use, Calibration, and Validation
Arnold, J. G., Moriasi, D. N., Gassman, P. W., Abbaspour, K. C., White, M. J., Srinivasan, R., Santhi, C., Harmel, R. D., van Griensven, A., Liew, M. W. V., et al. (2012) · Transactions of the ASABE · doi:10.13031/2013.42256 · Cited by 3,450
Gassman, P. W., Reyes, M. R., Green, C. H., & Arnold, J. G. (2007) · Transactions of the ASABE · doi:10.13031/2013.23637 · Cited by 3,040
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
Self-citationChien, H., Yeh, P. J.-F., & Knouft, J. H. (2013) · Journal of Hydrology · doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2013.03.026 · Cited by 202
Site-Scale Integrated Decision Support Tool (i-DSTss) for Stormwater Management
Shojaeizadeh, A., Geza, M., McCray, J., & Hogue, T. S. (2019) · Water · doi:10.3390/w11102022 · Cited by 20
Metadata
- Authors
- White, K. L., & Chaubey, I.
- Venue
- Journal of the American Water Resources Association
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2005-10
- Volume
- 41
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1077-1089
- ISSN
- 1093-474X (ISSN-L)
- 1752-1688
- OpenAlex
- W2118456616
- Cited by
- 433
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 16.93
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS, CALIBRATION, AND VALIDATIONS FOR A MULTISITE AND MULTIVARIABLE SWAT MODEL. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1752-1688.2005.tb03786.x
- The paper
- White, K. L., & Chaubey, I. (2005). SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS, CALIBRATION, AND VALIDATIONS FOR A MULTISITE AND MULTIVARIABLE SWAT MODEL. Journal of the American Water Resources Association. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-1688.2005.tb03786.x
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.