The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Technical Note: Method of Morris effectively reduces the computational demands of global sensitivity analysis for distributed watershed models
Open accessAbstract
Abstract. The increase in spatially distributed hydrologic modeling warrants a corresponding increase in diagnostic methods capable of analyzing complex models with large numbers of parameters. Sobol' sensitivity analysis has proven to be a valuable tool for diagnostic analyses of hydrologic models. However, for many spatially distributed models, the Sobol' method requires a prohibitive number of model evaluations to reliably decompose output variance across the full set of parameters. We investigate the potential of the method of Morris, a screening-based sensitivity approach, to provide results sufficiently similar to those of the Sobol' method at a greatly reduced computational expense. The methods are benchmarked on the Hydrology Laboratory Research Distributed Hydrologic Model (HL-RDHM) over a six-month period in the Blue River watershed, Oklahoma, USA. The Sobol' method required over six million model evaluations to ensure reliable sensitivity indices, corresponding to more than 30 000 computing hours and roughly 180 gigabytes of storage space. We find that the method of Morris is able to correctly screen the most and least sensitive parameters with 300 times fewer model evaluations, requiring only 100 computing hours and 1 gigabyte of storage space. The method of Morris proves to be a promising diagnostic approach for global sensitivity analysis of highly parameterized, spatially distributed hydrologic models.
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
Global Sensitivity Analysis. The Primer
Saltelli, A., Ratto, M., Andres, T., Campolongo, F., Cariboni, J., Gatelli, D., Saisana, M., & Tarantola, S. (2007) · doi:10.1002/9780470725184 · Cited by 6,430
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
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
Cited by
(2019) · doi:10.5194/hess-23-5089-2019 · Cited by 1,223
Global Sensitivity Analysis of environmental models: Convergence and validation
Sarrazin, F., Pianosi, F., & Wagener, T. (2016) · Environmental Modelling & Software · doi:10.1016/j.envsoft.2016.02.005 · Cited by 391
Self-citationYang, D., Liu, W., Tang, L., Chen, L., Li, X., & Xu, X. (2019) · Landscape and Urban Planning · doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2018.10.011 · Cited by 328
Assessing sensitivities in algorithmic detection of tropical cyclones in climate data
Zarzycki, C. M., & Ullrich, P. A. (2017) · Geophysical Research Letters · doi:10.1002/2016gl071606 · Cited by 158
Metadata
- Authors
- Herman, J. D., Kollat, J. B., Reed, P. M., & Wagener, T.
- Venue
- Hydrology and Earth System Sciences
- Publisher
- Copernicus GmbH
- Published
- 2013-07-24
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 2893-2903
- ISSN
- 1027-5606 (ISSN-L)
- 1607-7938
- OpenAlex
- W2012998201
- Cited by
- 237
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 10.14
- 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: Technical Note: Method of Morris effectively reduces the computational demands of global sensitivity analysis for distributed watershed models. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5194/hess-17-2893-2013
- The paper
- Herman, J. D., Kollat, J. B., Reed, P. M., & Wagener, T. (2013). Technical Note: Method of Morris effectively reduces the computational demands of global sensitivity analysis for distributed watershed models. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-17-2893-2013
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.