All models are wrong, how do we know which are useful?

Ground Water

Volumn 45, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 390-391

  Poeter, Eileen ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

FRESH WATER;

NOTE; THEORETICAL MODEL; WATER FLOW; WATER SUPPLY;

FRESH WATER; MODELS, THEORETICAL; WATER MOVEMENTS; WATER SUPPLY;

EID: 34347236570     PISSN: 0017467X     EISSN: 17456584     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-6584.2007.00350.x     Document Type: Note

References (13)

1. Banta, E.R. epoeter@mines.edu, M.C. Hill, E.P. Poeter, J.E. Doherty, and J. Babendreier. Building model analysis applications with the Joint Universal Parameter IdenTification and Evaluation of Reliability (JUPITER) API. Computers & Geosciences. In press.
2. Banta, E.R., E.P. Poeter, J.E. Doherty, and M.C. Hill. 2006. JUPITER: Joint Universal Parameter IdenTification and Estimation of Reliability - An application programming interface (API) for model analysis. USGS Techniques and Methods, Book 6, Section E, Chapter 1. Reston, Virginia : USGS.
3. Burnham, K.P., and D.R. Anderson. 2004. Multi-model inference: Understanding AIC and BIC model selection. Sociological Methods and Research 33, no. 2 : 261 304.
4. Burnham, K.P., and D.R. Anderson. 2002. Model Selection and Multi-Model Inference: A Practical Information-Theoretic Approach. New York : Springer-Verlag.
5. Chamberlin, T.C. 1890. The method of multiple working hypotheses. Science 15, no. 366: 93-98. Reprinted 1965, Science 148, no. 3671 : 754 759.
6. Hill, M.C., and C.R. Tiedeman. 2007. Effective Groundwater Model Calibration, with Analysis of Sensitivities, Predictions, and Uncertainty. New York : Wiley and Sons.
7. Hunt, R.J., D.T. Feinstein, C.D. Pint, and M.P. Anderson. 2005. The importance of diverse data types to calibrate a watershed model of the Trout Lake Basin, Northern Wisconsin, USA. Journal of Hydrology 321, no. 3 : 286 296.
8. Lemke, L.D., and J.A. Cypher. 2006. Use of alternative conceptual geologic models to evaluate contaminant transport modeling uncertainty in a glacial aquifer system. In Proceedings of MODFLOW and MORE 2006: Managing Ground-Water Systems Conference of the International Ground-Water Modeling Center, Golden, Colorado, ed. E.P. Poeter, C. Zheng, and M.C. Hill, 41-45. Golden, Colorado: IGWMC.
9. Neuman, S.P., and P.J. Wierenga. 2003. A comprehensive strategy of hydrogeologic modeling and uncertainty analysis for nuclear facilities and sites. NUREG/CR-6805. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
10. Poeter, E.P., and M.C. Hill. 2007. MMA - Computer program for multimodel analysis. USGS Techniques and Methods TM6E-3. Reston, Virginia : USGS.
11. Poeter, E.P., M.C. Hill, and E.R. Banta. 2005. UCODE_2005 and six other computer codes for universal sensitivity analysis, calibration, and uncertainty evaluation. USGS Techniques and Methods 6-A11. Reston, Virginia : USGS.
12. Refsgaard, J.C., and A.L. Højberg. 2006. Uncertainty assessment in the modelling process - Beyond statistical uncertainty. In Proceedings of MODFLOW and MORE 2006: Managing Ground-Water Systems Conference of the International Ground-Water Modeling Center, Golden, Colorado, ed. E.P. Poeter, C. Zheng, and M.C. Hill, 4-8. Golden, Colorado: IGWMC.
13. Ruskauff, G.J., and A.V. Wolfsberg. 2006. Considering alternative conceptual models: The Pahute Mesa Flow Model. In Proceedings of MODFLOW and MORE 2006: Managing Ground-Water Systems Conference of the International Ground-Water Modeling Center, Golden, Colorado, ed. E.P. Poeter, C. Zheng, and M.C. Hill, 46-50. Golden, Colorado: IGWMC.