2004
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2003.09.021
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Validation of catchment models for predicting land-use and climate change impacts. 3. Blind validation for internal and outlet responses

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
68
0
5

Year Published

2005
2005
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 89 publications
(73 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
0
68
0
5
Order By: Relevance
“…19-23). This is accounted for by setting bound values on the more important model parameters and, through simulation, creating corresponding bounds on the model output (Ewen and Parkin, 1996;Lukey et al, 2000;Bathurst et al, 2004). The aim of the landslide modelling then becomes to bracket the observed pattern of occurrence with several simulations based on the different parameter bound values, rather than to reproduce the observed pattern as accurately as possible with one simulation (Bathurst et al, in press).…”
Section: Model Uncertaintymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…19-23). This is accounted for by setting bound values on the more important model parameters and, through simulation, creating corresponding bounds on the model output (Ewen and Parkin, 1996;Lukey et al, 2000;Bathurst et al, 2004). The aim of the landslide modelling then becomes to bracket the observed pattern of occurrence with several simulations based on the different parameter bound values, rather than to reproduce the observed pattern as accurately as possible with one simulation (Bathurst et al, in press).…”
Section: Model Uncertaintymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…More recently, physically based, spatially distributed hydrological models have complemented the experimental approach to provide new insights into the processes undergoing change, both prior and post-forest removal (Bathurst et al, 2004;Legesse et al, 2003;Li et al, 2007). Such work indicates that, due to shifts in evapotranspiration and soil hydraulic properties and moisture, increases in water yield can be expected after forest thinning (Hundecha and Bardossy, 2004;Li et al, 2007;Serengil et al, 2007;Webb and Kathuria, 2012) …”
Section: H a Moreno Et Al: Hydrologic Effects Of Forest Thinningmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The parameters like Strickler overland flow resistance coefficient, Actual Evapotranspiration/Potential Evapotranspiration ratio and soil parameters namely soil depth, saturated hydraulic conductivity, soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity functions were identified as key parameters required to be specified using field or calibrated data for flow simulations from studies conducted by Parkin [14], Bathurst et al [5,6] and Birkinshaw et al [18]. A sensitivity analysis of the above six parameters is performed to arrive at the final values.…”
Section: Model Calibration and Validationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The spatial heterogeneity of rainfall in the model is accounted by using various spatial interpolation methods. The impact of different spatiotemporal resolution of rainfall input on simulated runoff, using hydrological models other than SHETRAN, was examined by many studies [4,5,6,7]. Dirks et al, compared four interpolation methods namely the Inverse distance weighted method, Theissen polygon, Kriging and Areal mean method using rainfall data from a network of thirteen rain gauges in Norfolk Island [8].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%