1994
DOI: 10.1007/bf00877206
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effects of climatic variability on the hydrologic response of a freshwater watershed

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

1995
1995
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…To account for the limitation of projecting pSWA using data outside the bounds of the training data (e.g., higher maximum temperatures in the future than observed thus far), we used a Monte Carlo simulation to increase the generalization of the model by adding variance to the input projected data (Figure 2; Nishant et al., 2020). Monte Carlo simulations have been used to add stochasticity to climate scenarios (Nawaz & Adeloye, 2006; Nikolaidis et al., 1994; Prudhomme et al., 2003; Sankarasubramanian et al., 2001) and these varied parameters are then used in hydrological models to assess the impacts of climate change (Cameron et al., 2000). The variance we added was based on the deviation distribution of each projection data set from observed data.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To account for the limitation of projecting pSWA using data outside the bounds of the training data (e.g., higher maximum temperatures in the future than observed thus far), we used a Monte Carlo simulation to increase the generalization of the model by adding variance to the input projected data (Figure 2; Nishant et al., 2020). Monte Carlo simulations have been used to add stochasticity to climate scenarios (Nawaz & Adeloye, 2006; Nikolaidis et al., 1994; Prudhomme et al., 2003; Sankarasubramanian et al., 2001) and these varied parameters are then used in hydrological models to assess the impacts of climate change (Cameron et al., 2000). The variance we added was based on the deviation distribution of each projection data set from observed data.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To account for variability, a normal distribution was applied to flow. An exponential distribution was applied to the amount of rainfall, since rainfall is known to follow this statistical trend (Nikolaidis et al, 1994). The mean and standard deviation of flow (10 analyzed storms) from the copper roof area (42 ± 29 m 3 ), the paved area (2,720 ± 1,900 m 3 ), the grass area (3,500 ± 1,550 m 3 ), the noncopper roof area (1,610 ± 1,200 m 3 ), and the baseflow (1,620 ± 750 m 3 ), all contributed to the 9,320 ± 6,560 m 3 of water observed at the outlet of the watershed during a rainfall event.…”
Section: Parameter Estimationmentioning
confidence: 99%