Articles | Volume 26, issue 21
Research article
09 Nov 2022
Research article |  | 09 Nov 2022

Use of expert elicitation to assign weights to climate and hydrological models in climate impact studies

Eva Sebok, Hans Jørgen Henriksen, Ernesto Pastén-Zapata, Peter Berg, Guillaume Thirel, Anthony Lemoine, Andrea Lira-Loarca, Christiana Photiadou, Rafael Pimentel, Paul Royer-Gaspard, Erik Kjellström, Jens Hesselbjerg Christensen, Jean Philippe Vidal, Philippe Lucas-Picher, Markus G. Donat, Giovanni Besio, María José Polo, Simon Stisen, Yvan Caballero, Ilias G. Pechlivanidis, Lars Troldborg, and Jens Christian Refsgaard


Total article views: 2,642 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total Supplement BibTeX EndNote
2,023 565 54 2,642 175 41 41
  • HTML: 2,023
  • PDF: 565
  • XML: 54
  • Total: 2,642
  • Supplement: 175
  • BibTeX: 41
  • EndNote: 41
Views and downloads (calculated since 23 Dec 2021)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 23 Dec 2021)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 2,642 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 2,446 with geography defined and 196 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1


Latest update: 15 Apr 2024
Short summary
Hydrological models projecting the impact of changing climate carry a lot of uncertainty. Thus, these models usually have a multitude of simulations using different future climate data. This study used the subjective opinion of experts to assess which climate and hydrological models are the most likely to correctly predict climate impacts, thereby easing the computational burden. The experts could select more likely hydrological models, while the climate models were deemed equally probable.