66 citations as recorded by crossref.

1. Groundwater contamination sources identification based on the Long-Short Term Memory network J. Li et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2021.126670
2. Interactive Visualization for Evolutionary Optimization of Conceptual Rainfall-Streamflow Models M. Borthwick et al. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0887-3801(2008)22:1(40)
3. Parameter estimation and uncertainty analysis in hydrological modeling P. Herrera et al. https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1569
4. Methods used for the development of neural networks for the prediction of water resource variables in river systems: Current status and future directions H. Maier et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2010.02.003
5. Stormwater Detention System Parameter Sensitivity and Uncertainty Analysis Using SWMM J. Knighton et al. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0001382
6. Robust optimization of well location to enhance hysteretical trapping of CO2: Assessment of various uncertainty quantification methods and utilization of mixed response surface surrogates M. Babaei et al. https://doi.org/10.1002/2015WR017418
7. A systematic approach to determining metamodel scope for risk-based optimization and its application to water distribution system design D. Broad et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2014.11.015
8. Applying ANN emulators in uncertainty assessment of flood inundation modelling: a comparison of two surrogate schemes J. Yu et al. https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2014.943232
9. Current awareness https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.5823
10. Accounting for model error in Bayesian solutions to hydrogeophysical inverse problems using a local basis approach C. Köpke et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2017.11.013
11. Predictive uncertainty of a nearshore bed evolution model B. Ruessink https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csr.2004.12.007
12. Solving Inverse Problems of Unknown Contaminant Source in Groundwater-River Integrated Systems Using a Surrogate Transport Model Based Optimization A. Jamshidi et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12092415
13. Effect of different likelihood measures on parameter conditioning and model uncertainty F. Baig et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-025-02909-1
14. Computational intelligence methods for the efficient reliability analysis of complex flood defence structures G. Kingston et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strusafe.2010.08.002
15. Uncertainty analysis of linear and non-linear regression models in the modeling of water quality in the Caspian Sea basin: Application of Monte-Carlo method S. Masteali et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2024.112979
16. An Adaptive Surrogate-Assisted Simulation-Optimization Method for Identifying Release History of Groundwater Contaminant Sources M. Wu et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/w14101659
17. Bayesian uncertainty analysis in hydrological modeling associated with watershed subdivision level: a case study of SLURP model applied to the Xiangxi River watershed, China J. Han et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-013-0792-0
18. Uncertainty evaluation of multivariate quantities: A case study on electrical impedance P. Ramos et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2015.08.043
19. Multiobjective optimization of the groundwater exploitation layout in coastal areas based on multiple surrogate models Y. Fan et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-08367-2
20. A comparative analysis of auto-calibration strategies for the urban hydrologic model Y. Feng et al. https://doi.org/10.2166/nh.2025.159
21. A coupled ensemble filtering and probabilistic collocation approach for uncertainty quantification of hydrological models Y. Fan et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.09.035
22. Parametric uncertainty assessment in hydrological modeling using the generalized polynomial chaos expansion J. Hu et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2019.124158
23. Metamodel-assisted analysis of an integrated model composition: An example using linked surface water – groundwater models V. Christelis & A. Hughes https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2018.05.004
24. Comparison of Long Short-Term Memory and Weighted Regressions on Time, Discharge, and Season Models for Nitrate-N Load Estimation K. Jung et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12155942
25. Groundwater Management and Allocation Models: A Review K. Norouzi Khatiri et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/w15020253
26. Enhancing interpretability and generalizability of deep learning-based emulator in three-dimensional lake hydrodynamics using Koopman operator and transfer learning: Demonstrated on the example of lake Zurich W. Tian et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2023.120996
27. Multiobjective calibration with Pareto preference ordering: An application to rainfall‐runoff model calibration S. Khu & H. Madsen https://doi.org/10.1029/2004WR003041
28. Comparison of Two Bayesian-MCMC Inversion Methods for Laboratory Infiltration and Field Irrigation Experiments Q. Guo et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17031108
29. Hydrogeophysical Parameter Estimation Using Iterative Ensemble Smoothing and Approximate Forward Solvers C. Köpke et al. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2019.00034
30. Adaptive surrogate modeling for optimization of flood control detention dams J. Yazdi & S. Salehi Neyshabouri https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2014.07.007
31. Efficient prediction uncertainty approximation in the calibration of environmental simulation models B. Tolson & C. Shoemaker https://doi.org/10.1029/2007WR005869
32. A fuzzy rule based metamodel for monthly catchment nitrate fate simulations S. van der Heijden & U. Haberlandt https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.10.039
33. The reliability of an ‘off‐the‐shelf’ conceptual rainfall runoff model for use in climate impact assessment: uncertainty quantification using Latin hypercube sampling C. Murphy et al. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4762.2006.00656.x
34. Assessing and Improving the Robustness of Bayesian Evidential Learning in One Dimension for Inverting Time-Domain Electromagnetic Data: Introducing a New Threshold Procedure A. Ahmed et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/w16071056
35. An improved Bayesian approach linked to a surrogate model for identifying groundwater pollution sources Y. An et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-021-02411-2
36. Artificial neural network assisted Bayesian calibration of climate models T. Hauser et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-011-1168-0
37. Groundwater Response of Loess Tableland in Northwest China under Irrigation Conditions F. Dai & Q. Guo https://doi.org/10.3390/w12092546
38. Application of Artificial Neural Networks Based Monte Carlo Simulation in the Expert System Design and Control of Crude Oil Distillation Column of a Nigerian Refinery L. Popoola & A. Susu https://doi.org/10.4236/aces.2014.42030
39. On the use of surrogate-based modeling for the numerical analysis of Low Impact Development techniques G. Brunetti et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.03.013
40. A novel approach to parameter uncertainty analysis of hydrological models using neural networks D. Shrestha et al. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-13-1235-2009
41. Telescoping strategies for improved parameter estimation of environmental simulation models L. Matott et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2013.07.023
42. Review: Sources of Hydrological Model Uncertainties and Advances in Their Analysis E. Moges et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/w13010028
43. A comprehensive strategy for modeling watershed restoration priority areas under epistemic uncertainty: A case study in the Atlantic Forest, Brazil I. Possantti et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2022.129003
44. Uncertainty in a monthly water balance model using the generalized likelihood uncertainty estimation methodology D. Rivera et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12040-014-0528-7
45. Surrogate modeling and risk-based analysis for solute transport simulations E. Arandia et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-018-1549-6
46. Ensemble model aggregation using a computationally lightweight machine-learning model to forecast ocean waves F. O’Donncha et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmarsys.2019.103206
47. Exploratory modeling for analyzing coupled human-natural systems under uncertainty E. Moallemi et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2020.102186
48. GLUE: 20 years on K. Beven & A. Binley https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.10082
49. Robust Data Worth Analysis with Surrogate Models M. Gosses & T. Wöhling https://doi.org/10.1111/gwat.13098
50. Kriging meta‐model assisted calibration of computational fluid dynamics models O. Kajero et al. https://doi.org/10.1002/aic.15352
51. On uncertainty quantification in hydrogeology and hydrogeophysics N. Linde et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2017.10.014
52. An agent-monitored framework for the output-oriented design of experiments in exploratory modelling E. Moallemi et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.simpat.2018.09.008
53. Performance evaluation, sensitivity, and uncertainty analysis of HBV model in Wami Ruvu basin, Tanzania N. Tibangayuka et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrh.2022.101266
54. Identifying the release history of a groundwater contaminant source based on an ensemble surrogate model Z. Xing et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2019.03.020
55. Parameter identification and calibration of the Xin’anjiang model using the surrogate modeling approach Y. Ye et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11707-014-0424-0
56. Evaluation of Four GLUE Likelihood Measures and Behavior of Large Parameter Samples in ISPSO-GLUE for TOPMODEL H. Cho et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11030447
57. Review of surrogate modeling in water resources S. Razavi et al. https://doi.org/10.1029/2011WR011527
58. Advances in the study of uncertainty quantification of large-scale hydrological modeling system X. Song et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11442-011-0881-2
59. Long-term increase in diffuse groundwater recharge following expansion of rainfed cultivation in the Sahel, West Africa M. Ibrahim et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-014-1143-z
60. Estimating uncertainty in flood model outputs using machine learning informed by Monte Carlo analysis M. Nguyen et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2025.133928
61. Numerical assessment of metamodelling strategies in computationally intensive optimization S. Razavi et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2011.09.010
62. Discussion of “Automatic Calibration of the U.S. EPA SWMM Model for a Large Urban Catchment” by J. Barco, K. M. Wong, and M. K. Stenstrom J. Ball https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HY.1943-7900.0000016
63. Assessing uncertainty propagation in hybrid models for daily streamflow simulation based on arbitrary polynomial chaos expansion P. Zhou et al. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2021.104110
64. Does the Complexity of Evapotranspiration and Hydrological Models Enhance Robustness? D. Birhanu et al. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10082837
65. Robust optimization of subsurface flow using polynomial chaos and response surface surrogates M. Babaei et al. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10596-015-9516-5
66. Can a regionalized model parameterisation be improved with a limited number of runoff measurements? D. Viviroli & J. Seibert https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.07.009