Pulse Brain · Growing Health Evidence Index
Peer-reviewed

Review: Sources of Hydrological Model Uncertainties and Advances in Their Analysis

Edom Moges, Yonas Demissie, Laurel G. Larsen, Fuad Yassin

Water · 2020

Read source ↗ All evidence

Summary

Despite progresses in representing different processes, hydrological models remain uncertain. Their uncertainty stems from input and calibration data, model structure, and parameters. In characterizing these sources, their causes, interactions and different uncertainty analysis (UA) methods are reviewed. The commonly used UA methods are categorized into six broad classes: (i) Monte Carlo analysis, (ii) Bayesian statistics, (iii) multi-objective analysis, (iv) least-squares-based inverse modeling, (v) response-surface-based techniques, and (vi) multi-modeling analysis. For each source of uncertainty, the status-quo and applications of these methods are critiqued in gauged catchments where UA is common and in ungauged catchments where both UA and its review are lacking. Compared to parameter

Source type
Peer-reviewed study
DOI
10.3390/w13010028
Catalogue ID
SNmokylzoq-2vo6ya
Pulse AI · ask about this record

Dig deeper with Pulse AI.

Pulse AI has read the whole catalogue. Ask about this record, its theme, or how the findings apply to UK farming and policy — every answer cites the underlying studies.