The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comparing sensitivity analysis methods to advance lumped watershed model identification and evaluation
Open accessAbstract
Abstract. This study seeks to identify sensitivity tools that will advance our understanding of lumped hydrologic models for the purposes of model improvement, calibration efficiency and improved measurement schemes. Four sensitivity analysis methods were tested: (1) local analysis using parameter estimation software (PEST), (2) regional sensitivity analysis (RSA), (3) analysis of variance (ANOVA), and (4) Sobol's method. The methods' relative efficiencies and effectiveness have been analyzed and compared. These four sensitivity methods were applied to the lumped Sacramento soil moisture accounting model (SAC-SMA) coupled with SNOW-17. Results from this study characterize model sensitivities for two medium sized watersheds within the Juniata River Basin in Pennsylvania, USA. Comparative results for the 4 sensitivity methods are presented for a 3-year time series with 1 h, 6 h, and 24 h time intervals. The results of this study show that model parameter sensitivities are heavily impacted by the choice of analysis method as well as the model time interval. Differences between the two adjacent watersheds also suggest strong influences of local physical characteristics on the sensitivity methods' results. This study also contributes a comprehensive assessment of the repeatability, robustness, efficiency, and ease-of-implementation of the four sensitivity methods. Overall ANOVA and Sobol's method were shown to be superior to RSA and PEST. Relative to one another, ANOVA has reduced computational requirements and Sobol's method yielded more robust sensitivity rankings.
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
An Algorithm for Least-Squares Estimation of Nonlinear Parameters
Marquardt, D. W. (1963) · Journal of the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics · doi:10.1137/0111030 · Cited by 30,728
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
Beven, K., & Freer, J. (2001) · Journal of Hydrology · doi:10.1016/s0022-1694(01)00421-8 · Cited by 2,189
Identification and Review of Sensitivity Analysis Methods
Christopher Frey, H., & Patil, S. R. (2002) · Risk Analysis · doi:10.1111/0272-4332.00039 · Cited by 1,036
Cited by
Convergence and uncertainty analyses in Monte-Carlo based sensitivity analysis
Yang, J. (2011) · Environmental Modelling & Software · doi:10.1016/j.envsoft.2010.10.007 · Cited by 326
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
Jaxa-Rozen, M., & Kwakkel, J. (2018) · Environmental Modelling & Software · doi:10.1016/j.envsoft.2018.06.011 · Cited by 91
Weise, T., Grewe, C., & Pfaff, M. (2020) · Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology · doi:10.3389/fbioe.2020.00453 · Cited by 27
Metadata
- Authors
- Tang, Y., Reed, P., Wagener, T., & van Werkhoven, K.
- Venue
- Hydrology and Earth System Sciences
- Publisher
- Copernicus GmbH
- Published
- 2007-02-05
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 793-817
- ISSN
- 1027-5606 (ISSN-L)
- 1607-7938
- OpenAlex
- W2137300432
- Cited by
- 422
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 16.78
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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: Comparing sensitivity analysis methods to advance lumped watershed model identification and evaluation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5194/hess-11-793-2007
- The paper
- Tang, Y., Reed, P., Wagener, T., & van Werkhoven, K. (2007). Comparing sensitivity analysis methods to advance lumped watershed model identification and evaluation. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-11-793-2007
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.