Open Access
| Issue |
BIO Web Conf.
Volume 242, 2026
3rd International Research Meeting of Forest Culture Science in Asia (FOCUS-Asia 2026)
|
|
|---|---|---|
| Article Number | 01007 | |
| Number of page(s) | 17 | |
| Section | Forest Diversity | |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1051/bioconf/202624201007 | |
| Published online | 07 July 2026 | |
- C. Asdak and U. G. M. Press, Hidrologi dan Pengelolaan Daerah Aliran Sungai. (UGM PRESS, 2023) [Google Scholar]
- S. Bergström, “THE HBV model - its structure and applications,” Swedish Meteorol. Hydrol. Institute, Norrköping. 4, 4, 1-3, (1992) [Google Scholar]
- E. Moges, Y. Demissie, L. Larsen, and F. Yassin, “Review: Sources of hydrological model uncertainties and advances in their analysis,” Water (Switzerland). 13, 1, 1-23 (2021) https://doi.org/10.3390/w13010028 [Google Scholar]
- V. P. Singh, R. Singh, P. K. Paul, D. S. Bisht, and S. Gaur, Hydrological Processes Modelling and Data Analysis. (Springer Singapore, 2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-1316-5 [Google Scholar]
- J. Fu, N. Xia, and G. Zhang, “Research on Landform Classification of Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Region Based on SRTM Remote Sensing Image Data,” IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 252, 5 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/252/5/052006. [Google Scholar]
- S. Trajkovic, “Hargreaves versus Penman-Monteith,” J. Irrig. Drain. Eng. 133, 1, 38-42 (2007) [Google Scholar]
- D. Maraun, “Bias correction, quantile mapping, and downscaling: Revisiting the inflation issue,” J. Clim. 26, 6, 2137-2143 (2013) https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00821.1. [Google Scholar]
- D. N. Moriasi, J. G. Arnold, M. W. Van Liew, R. L. Bingner, R. D. Harmel, and T. L. Veith, “Model Evaluation Guidelines for Systematic Quantification of Accuracy in Watershed Simulations,” 50, 3, 885-900 (2007) https://doi.org/10.13031/2013.23153. [Google Scholar]
- C. Onyutha, “Pros and cons of various efficiency criteria for hydrological model performance evaluation,” Proc. Int. Assoc. Hydrol. Sci. 385, 181-187 (2024) https://doi.org/10.5194/piahs-385-181-2024. [Google Scholar]
- H. V. Gupta, H. Kling, K. K. Yilmaz, and G. F. Martinez, “Decomposition of the mean squared error and NSE performance criteria: Implications for improving hydrological modelling,” J. Hydrol. 377, 1-2, 80-91 (2009) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.08.003. [Google Scholar]
- G. Tegegne, Y. O. Kim, S. B. Seo, and Y. Kim, “Hydrological modelling uncertainty analysis for different flow quantiles: a case study in two hydro-geographically different watersheds,” Hydrol. Sci. J. 64, 4, 473-489 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2019.1587562. [Google Scholar]
- S. Bhattarai, Y. Zhou, N. M. Shakya, and C. Zhao, “Hydrological modelling and climate change impact assessment using HBV light model: A case study of Narayani river basin, Nepal,” Nat. Environ. Pollut. Technol. 17, 3, 691-702 (2018) [Google Scholar]
- Q. Zhu, X. Qin, D. Zhou, T. Yang, and X. Song, “Impacts of spatiotemporal resolutions of precipitation on flood event simulation based on multimodel structures -- a case study over the Xiang River basin in China,” Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 28, 7, 1665-1686 (2024) https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-1665-2024. [Google Scholar]
- J. Gou, C. Miao, S. Sorooshian, Q. Duan, X. Guo, and T. Su, “Satellite-based precipitation error propagation in the hydrological modeling chain across China,” J. Hydrol. 632, November 2023, 130906 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2024.130906. [Google Scholar]
- R.-S. Blasone, J. A. Vrugt, H. Madsen, D. Rosbjerg, B. A. Robinson, and G. A. Zyvoloski, “Generalized likelihood uncertainty estimation (GLUE) using adaptive Markov Chain Monte Carlo sampling,” Adv. Water Resour. 31, 4, 630-648 (2008) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2007.12.003. [Google Scholar]
Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.
Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.
Initial download of the metrics may take a while.