Simpler models in environmental studies and predictions

References

• Ajami, N.K., Gupta, H., Wagener, T., and Sorooshian, S. (2004). Calibration of a semi-distributed hydrologic model for streamflow estimation along a river system. J. Hydrol., 298(1–4), 112–135.
   Google Scholar
• Altman, S.J., Arnold, B.W., Barnard, R.W., Barr, G.E., Ho, C.K., McKenna, S.A., and Eaton, R.R. (1996). Flow calculation for Yucca mountain groundwater travel time (GWTT-95). Technical Report SAND-96-0819, Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories.
   Google Scholar
• Asgharbeygi, N., Langley, P., Bay, S., and Arrigo, K. (2006). Inductive revision of quantitative process models. Ecol. Model., 194(1–3), 70–79.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Atanasova, N., Todorovski, L., Džeroski, S., and Kompare, B. (2006). Constructing a library of domain knowledge for automated modelling of aquatic ecosystems. Ecol. Model., 194(1–3), 14–36.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Babendreier, J.E., and Castleton, K.J. (2005). Investigating uncertainty and sensitivity in integrated, multimedia environmental models: tools for FRAMES-3MRA. Environ. Modell. Softw., 20(8), 1043–1055.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Babendreier, J.E., Matott, L.S., Hameedi, J., Dennis, R.L., Knightes, C.D., Mathur, R., Mohamoud, Y.M., Johnston, J.M., West, C.C., Laniak, G.F., Gaber, N., Pascual, P., and Araujo, R. (2007). Managing multimedia pollution for a multimedia world. (the magazine for environmental managers). Air Waste Manage. Assoc., 12, 6–11.
   Google Scholar
• Bai, Y., Wagener, T., and Reed, P. (2009). A top-down framework for watershed model evaluation and selection under uncertainty. Environ. Model. Softw., 24(8), 901–916.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baker, A. (2007). Occam's Razor in science: a case study from biogeography. Biol. Phil., 22, 193–215.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barlas, Y. (2007). Leverage points to march “upward from the aimless plateau”. Syst. Dynam. Rev., 23(4), 469–473.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bau, D.A., and Mayer, A.S. (2006). Stochastic management of pump-and-treat strategies using surrogate functions. Adv. Water Resour., 29(12), 1901–1917.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beven, K. (1989). Changing ideas in hydrology: the case of physically-based models. J. Hydrol., 105, 157–172.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beven, K. (2000). Uniqueness of place and the representation of hydrological processes. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 4, 203–213.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beven, K. (2001). How far can we go in distributed hydrological modeling?. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 5, 1–12.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beven, K. (2002). Towards a coherent philosophy for modeling the environment. Proc. R. Soc. A., 458(2026), 2465–2484.
   Google Scholar
• Bhattacharya, B., and Solomatine, D.P. (2005). Neural networks and M5 model trees in modelling water level – discharge relationship. Neurocomputing, 63, 381–396.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bigelow, J.H., and Davis, P.K. (2003). Implications for model validation of multiresolution, multiperspective modeling (Mrmpm) and exploratory analysis. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
   Google Scholar
• Blanning, R.W. (1975). The construction and implementation of metamodels. Simulation, 24, 177–184.
   Google Scholar
• Bliznyuk, N., Ruppert, D., Shoemaker, C., Regis, C., Wild, S., and Mugunthan, S. (2008). Bayesian calibration and uncertainty analysis for computationally expensive models using optimization and radial basis function approximation. J. Comput. Graph. Stat., 17(2), 270–294.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bolte, J.P., Hulse, D.W., Gregory, S.V., and Smith, C. (2006). Modeling biocomplexity – actors, landscapes and alternative futures. Environ. Modell. Softw., 22, 570–579.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borgonovo, E., Castaings, W., and Tarantola, S. (2012). Model emulation and moment-independent sensitivity analysis: An application to environmental modelling. Environ. Modell. Softw., 34, 105–115.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brooks, R.J., and Tobias, A.M. (1996). Choosing the best model: Level of detail, complexity, and model performance. Math. Comput. Model., 24(4), 1–14.
   Google Scholar
• Bugmann, H.K.M., Yan, X., Sykes, M., and Martin, P. (1996). A comparison of forest gap models: Model structure and behaviour. Clim. Chang., 34(2), 289–313.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Campo-Bescós, M. A., Muñoz-Carpena, R., Southworth, J., Zhu, L., Waylen, P. R., & Bunting, E. (2013). Combined spatial and temporal effects of environmental controls on long-term monthly NDVI in the southern Africa Savanna. Remote Sensing, 5(12), 6513–6538.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castelletti, A., Galelli, S., Ratto, M., Soncini-Sessa, R., and Young, P.C. (2012a). A general framework for Dynamic Emulation Modelling in environmental problems. Environ. Model. Softw., 34, 5–18.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castelletti, A., Pianosi, F., Quach, X., and Sonicini-Sessa, R. (2012b). Assessing water reservoir management and development in Northern Vietnam. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 16, 189–199.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caughlin, D., and Sisti, A.F. (1997). Summary of model abstraction techniques. Proc. SPIE 3083, Enabling Technol. Simul. Sci., 22–13.
   Google Scholar
• Childs, S.W., and Hanks, R.J. (1975). Model of soil salinity effects on crop growth. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 39, 617–621.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chu, H.J., and Chang, L.C. (2009). Optimal control algorithm and neural network for dynamic groundwater management. Hydrol. Process., 23(19), 2765–2773.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chwif, L., Barretto, M., and Paul, R. (2000). On simulation model complexity. In A. Joines, R.R. Barton, K. Kang, and P.A. Fishwick (Eds.), Proceedings of the 32nd Conference on Winter Simulation, pp. 449–455.
   Google Scholar
• Clark, M.P., Kavetski, D., and Fenicia, F. (2011). Pursuing the method of multiple working hypotheses for hydrological modeling. Water Resour. Res., 47, W09301.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark, M.P., Nijssen, B., Lundquist, J. D., Kavetski, D., Rupp, D. E., and Woods, R. A. (2015a). A unified approach for process-based hydrologic modeling: 1. Modeling concept. Water Resour. Res., 51(4), 2498–2514.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark, M.P., Nijssen, B., Lundquist, J. D., Kavetski, D., Rupp, D. E., and Woods, R. A. (2015b). A unified approach for process-based hydrologic modeling: 2. Model implementation and case studies. Water Resour. Res., 51(4), 2515–2542.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark, M.P., Slater, A.G., Rupp, D.E., Woods, R.A., Vrugt, J.A., Gupta, H.V., Wagener, T., and Hay, L.E. (2008). FUSE: A modular framework to diagnose differences between hydrological models. Water Resour. Res., 44, W00B02.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clement, T. P. (2011). Complexities in hindcasting models—when should we say enough is enough? Groundwater, 49(5), 620–629.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Come, G., Beon, O., Albrecht, A., Gallerand, M.O., Little, R.H., and Strenge, D.L. (2004). “Evaluating multimedia exposure codes” the BIOSCOMP exercise. In G. Whelan (Ed.). Brownfields: multimedia modeling and assessment. Billerica, MA, USA: Computational Mechanics, Inc., and Southampton, UK: WIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cox, G.M., Gibbons, J.M., Wood, A.T.A., Craigon, J., Ramsden, S.J., and Crout, N.M.J. (2006). Towards the systematic simplification of mechanistic models. Ecol. Model., 198(1–2), 240–246.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cramer, M.D., and Verboom, G.A. (2017). Measures of biologically relevant environmental heterogeneity improve prediction of regional plant species richness. J. Biogeogr., 44(3), 579–591.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crawley, M.J. (2005). Statistics: An introduction using R. Statistical modelling (Chapter 7). Sussex, UK: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Cunge, J.A. 2003. Of data and models. J. Hydroinformatics, 5, 75–98.
   Google Scholar
• David, O., Ascough II, J.C., Lloyd, W., Green, T.R., Rojas, K.W., Leavesley, G.H., and Ahuja, L.R. (2013). A software engineering perspective on environmental modeling framework design: the object modeling system. Environ. Modell. Softw., 39, 201–213.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis, P.K., and Bigelow, J.H. (2003). Motivated metamodels: Synthesis of cause–effect reasoning and statistical metamodeling. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
   Google Scholar
• Decoursey, D.G. (1992). Developing models with more detail: Do more algorithms give more truth? Weed Technol., 6(3), 709–715.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Denton, C.M., and Sklash, M.G. (2006). Contaminant fate and transport in the courtroom. Volume 10. In E.J. Calabrese, P.T. Kostecki, and J. Dragun (Eds.), Contaminated Soils, Sediments and Water Volume 10. Successes and Challenges (pp. 81-–18). New York: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Doherty, J., and Christensen, S. (2011), Use of paired simple and complex models to reduce predictive bias and quantify uncertainty. Water Resour. Res., 47, W12534, doi:10.1029/2011WR010763.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dooge, J.C.I., Bruen, M., and Parmentier, B. (1999). A simple model for estimating the sensitivity of runoff to long-term changes in precipitation without a change in vegetation. Adv. Water Resour., 23, 153–163.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dortch, M.S., Fant, S., and Gerald, J.A. (2007). Modeling fate of RDX at demolition area 2 of the Massachusetts military reservation. J. Soil. Sediment. Contam., 16(6), 617–635.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dortch, M.S., and Gerard, J.A. (2004). Recent advances in the Army Risk assessment modeling system. In G. Whelan (Ed.), Brownfields: Multimedia modeling and assessment. Billerica, MA, USA: Computational Mechanics, Inc., and Southampton, UK: WIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dunker, A.M. (1980). The response of an atmospheric reaction-transport model to changes in input functions. Atmos. Environ., 14(6), 671–679.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elith, J., Leathwick, J.R., and Hastie, T. (2008) A working guide to boosted regression trees. J. Anim. Ecol., 77, 802–813.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erdal, D., Neuweiler, I., and Wollschläger, U. (2014). Using a bias aware EnKF to account for unresolved structure in an unsaturated zone model. Water Resour. Res., 50(1), 132–147.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eriksson, O., and Tegnér, J. (2016). Modeling and model simplification to facilitate biological insights and predictions. In L. Geris and D. Gomez-Cabrero (Eds.), Uncertainty in biology: A computational modeling approach. New York, Heidelberg Dordrecht London: Springer, Cham.
   Google Scholar
• Esche, E., Müller, D., Kraus, R., and Wozny, G. (2014). Systematic approaches for model derivation for optimization purposes. Chem. Eng. Sci., 115, 215–224.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Estes, L.D., Bradley, B.A., Beukes, H., Hole, D.G., Lau, M., Oppenheimer, M.G., Schulze, R., Tadross, M.A., and Turner, W.R. (2013). Comparing mechanistic and empirical model projections of crop suitability and productivity: Implications for ecological forecasting. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr., 22, 1007–1018.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farina, A. (2006). Principles and methods in landscape ecology: Towards a science of landscape. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Fen, C.S., Chan, C.C., and Cheng, H.C. (2009). Assessing a response surface-based optimization approach for soil vapor extraction system design. J. Water Resour. Plan. Manage., 135(3), 198–207.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fernandes, L.C., Paiva, C.M., and Filho, O.C.R. (2012). Evaluation of six empirical evapotranspiration equations- case study: Campos Dos Goytacazes/RJ. Rev. Bras. Meteorol., 27(3), 272–280.
   Google Scholar
• Field, M.S., and Pinsky, P.F. (2000). A two-region nonequilibrium model for solute transport in solution conduits in karstic aquifers. J. Contam. Hydrol., 44, 329–351.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fienen, M.N., Nolan, B.T., and Feinstein, D.T. (2016). Evaluating the sources of water to wells: Three techniques for metamodeling of a groundwater flow model. Environ. Model. Softw., 77, 95–107.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fishwick, P.A. (1995). Simulation model design and execution: Building digital worlds. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Foglia, L., Mehl, S. W., Hill, M. C., and Burlando, P. (2013). Evaluating model structure adequacy: The case of the Maggia Valley groundwater system, southern Switzerland. Water Resour. Res., 49, 260–282.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frantz, K.F. (1995). A taxonomy of model abstraction techniques. In K. Alexopoulos, K. Kang, W.R. Lilegdon, and D. Goldsman (Eds.). Proceedings of the 1995 Winter Simulation Conference, pp. 1413–1420. Catonsville, MD: INFORMS.
   Google Scholar
• Fraser, C.E., McIntyre, N., Jackson, B.M., and Wheater, H.S. (2013). Upscaling hydrological processes and land management change impacts using a metamodeling procedure. Water Resour. Res., 49, 5717–5833.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gaber, N., Laniak, G.F., and Linker, L. (2008). Integrated modeling for integrated environmental decision making. Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, <https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-02/documents/im4iedm_white_paper_final_epa100r08010_0.pdf >(last accessed 14.09.16.).
   Google Scholar
• Ge, Q., Ciuffo, B., and Menendez, M. (2015). Combining screening and metamodel-based methods: An efficient sequential approach for the sensitivity analysis of model outputs. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf., 134, 334–344.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ghavidelfar, S., Alvankar, S.R., and Razmkhah, A. (2011). Comparison of the lumped and quasi-distributed runoff models in simulating flood hydrographs on a semi-arid watershed. Water Resour. Manage., 25, 1775–1790.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grace, J.B., Anderson, T.M., Seabloom, E.W., Borer, E.T., Adler, P.B., Harpole, W.S., … & Bakker, J.D. (2016). Integrative modelling reveals mechanisms linking productivity and plant species richness. Nature, 529(7586), 390.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guber, A.K., Pachepsky, Y.A., Yakirevich, A.M., Shelton, D.R., Sadeghi, A.M., Goodrich, D.C., and Unkrich, C.L. (2011). Uncertainty in modelling of faecal coliform overland transport associated with manure application in Maryland. Hydrol. Process., 15, 2393–2404.
   Google Scholar
• Gupta, H., Wagener, T., and Liu, Y. (2008). Reconciling theory with observations: Elements of a diagnostic approach to model evaluation. Hydrol. Process., 22, 3802–3813.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gupta, H.V., Clark, M.P., Vrugt, J.A., Abramowitz, G., and Ye, M. (2012). Towards a comprehensive assessment of model structural adequacy. Water Resour. Res., 48(8). https://doi.org/10.1029/2011WR011044.
   Google Scholar
• Håkanson, L. (1999). On the principles and factors determining the predictive success of ecosystem models, with a focus on lake eutrophication models. Ecol. Model., 121, 139–160.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harpham, Q., Cleverley, P., & Kelly, D. (2014). The FluidEarth 2 implementation of OpenMI 2.0. J. Hydroinformatics, 16(4), 890–906.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hannemann-Tamás, R., Gábor, A., Szederkényi, G., & Hangos, K.M. (2013). Model complexity reduction of chemical reaction networks using mixed-integer quadratic programming. Comput. Math. Appl., 65(10), 1575–1595.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haydon, S., and Deletic, A. (2009). Model output uncertainty of a coupled pathogen indicator-hydrologic catchment model due to input data uncertainty. Environ. Model. Softw., 24, 322–328.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hecht-Nielsen, R. (1990). Neurocomputing. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Hill, C., DeLuca, C., Balaji, V., Suarez, M., and da Silva, A. (2004). The architecture of the earth system modeling framework. Comput. Sci. Eng., 6(1), 18–28.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hill, M.C. (1998). Methods and guidelines for effective model calibration, Water Resources Investigations Report 98–4005, Denver, CO: U. S. Geological Survey.
   Google Scholar
• Hill, M.C. (2006). The practical use of simplicity in developing ground-water models. Ground Water, 44(6), 775–781.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hill, M. C., Kavetski, D., Clark, M., Ye, M., Arabi, M., Lu, D., Foglia, L., Mehl, S. (2016). Practical use of computationally frugal model analysis methods. Groundwater, 54(2), 159–170, doi: 10.1111/gwat.12330.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horowitz, A., Meisel, W.S., and Collins, D.G. (1973). The Application of repro-modeling to the analysis of a photochemical pollution model (EPA-650/4-74-001). Washington DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
   Google Scholar
• Hussain, M.S., Javadi, A.A., Ahangar-Asr, A., and Farmani, R. (2015). A surrogate model for simulation–optimization of aquifer systems subjected to seawater intrusion. J. Hydrol., 523, 542–554.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Innis, G., and Rextad, E. (1983). Simulation model simplification techniques. Simulation, 41, 7–15.
   Google Scholar
• Iooss, B., and Lemaître, P. (2015). A review on global sensitivity analysis methods. In Uncertainty management in simulation–optimization of complex systems (pp. 101–122). New York, Heidelberg Dordrecht London: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Jakeman, A.J., and Hornberger, G.M. (1993). How much complexity is warranted in a rainfall-runoff Model?. Water Resour. Res., 29(8), 2637–2649.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jakeman, A.J., and Letcher, R.A. (2003). Integrated assessment and modelling: features, principles and examples for catchment management. Environ. Modell. Softw., 18(6), 491–501.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, V.M., and Rogers, L.L. (2000). Accuracy of neural network approximators in simulation–optimization. J. Water Resour. Plan. Manage., 126(2), 48–56.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnston, J.M., McGarvey, D.J., Barber, M.C., Laniak, G.F., Babendreier, J.E., Parmar, R., Wolfe, K., Kraemer, S.R., Cyterski, M., Knightes, C., Rashleigh, B., Suarez, L., and Ambrose, R. (2011). An integrated modeling framework for performing environmental assessments: application to ecosystem services in the Albemarle–Pamlico basins (NC and VA, USA). Ecol. Modell., 222(14), 2471–2484.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karas, T.H. (2004). Modelers and policymakers: Improving the relationships. Oak Ridge, TN: U.S. Department of Energy.
   Google Scholar
• Kavetski, D., and Clark, M.P. (2011). Numerical troubles in conceptual hydrology: Approximations, absurdities and impact on hypothesis testing. Hydrol. Proc., 25(4), 661–670.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keating, E.H., Doherty, J., Vrugt, J.A., and Kang, Q.J. (2010). Optimization and uncertainty assessment of strongly nonlinear groundwater models with high parameter dimensionality. Water Resour. Res., 46, W10517.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kekkonen, T.S., and Jakeman, A.J. (2001). A comparison of metric and conceptual approaches in rainfall runoff modeling and its implications. Water Resour. Res., 34, 2345–2352.
   Google Scholar
• Kelson, V.A., Hunt, R.J., and Haitjema, H.M. (2002). Improving a regional model using reduced complexity and parameter estimation. Ground Water, 40(2), 132–143.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kishné, A.S., Yimam, Y.T., Morgan, C. L. S., and Dornblaser, B.C. (2017). Evaluation and improvement of the default soil hydraulic parameters for the Noah Land Surface Model. Geoderma, 285, 247–259.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koch, S., and Flühler, H. (1993). Solute transport in aggregated porous media: Comparing model independent and dependent parameter estimation. Water Air Soil Pollut., 68, 275–289.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kourakos, G., and Mantoglou, A. (2009). Pumping optimization of coastal aquifers based on evolutionary algorithms and surrogate modular neural network models. Adv. Water Resour., 32(4), 507–521.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kourakos, G., and Mantoglou, A. (2013). Development of a multi-objective optimization algorithm using surrogate models for coastal aquifer management. J. Hydrol. 479, 13–23.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krawczyk, H. and Proficz, J. (2012). Real-Time multimedia stream data processing in a supercomputer environment. In I. Deliyannis (Ed.), Interactive multimedia. Rijeka, Croatia: InTechOpen.
   Google Scholar
• Krueger, O., and von Storch, J.S. (2011). A simple empirical model for decadal climate prediction. J. Clim., 24, 1276–1283.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krugman, P. (2000). How complicated does the model have to be?. Oxford Rev. Econ. Pol., 16(4), 33–42.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Landeras, G., Ortiz-Barredo, A., and Lo´pez, J.J. (2008). Comparison of artificial neural network models and empirical and semi-empirical equations for daily reference evapotranspiration estimation in the Basque Country (Northern Spain). Agric. Water Manage., 95, 553–565.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laniak, G.F., Droppo, J.G., Faillace, Jr., E.R., Gnanapragasam, E.K., Mills, W.B., Strenge, D.L., Whelan, G., and Yu, C. (1997). An overview of a multimedia benchmarking analysis for three risk assessment models: RESRAD, MMSOILS, and MEPAS. Risk Anal., 17(2), 203–214.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laniak, G.F., Olchin, G., Goodall, J., Voinov, A., Hill, M., Glynn, P., Whelan, G., Geller, G., Quinn, N., Blind, M., Peckham, S., Reaney, S., Gaber, N., Kennedy, R., and Hughes, A. (2013). Integrated environmental modeling: A vision and roadmap for the future. Environ. Modell. Softw., 39, 3–23.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, G., Rabitz, H., Yelvington, P.E., Oluwole, O.O., Bacon, F., Kolb, C.E., and Schoendorf, J. (2010). Global sensitivity analysis for systems with independent and/or correlated inputs. J. Phys. Chem. A., 114(19), 6022–6032.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Licznar, P., and Nearing, M. (2003). Artificial neural networks of soil erosion and runoff prediction at the plot scale. Catena, 51(2), 89–114.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liong, S.Y., Khu, S.T., and Chan, W.T. (2001). Derivation of Pareto front with genetic algorithm and neural network. J. Hydrol. Eng., 6(1), 52–61.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loague, K.M., and Freeze, R.A. (1985). A comparison of rainfall-runoff modeling techniques on small upland catchments. Water Resour. Res., 21, 229–248.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Masket, S, Dibike. Y.B., Jonoski, A., and Solomatine, D.P. (2000). Groundwater model approximation with ANN for selecting optimum pumping strategy for plume removal. In O. Schleider and A. Zijderveld (Eds.), Proc. 2nd Joint Workshop “Artificial Intelligence in Civil Engineering” (pp. 67–80).
   Google Scholar
• McLaren, R.G., Forsyth, P.A., Sudicky, E.A., Vanderkwaak, J.E., Schwartz, F.W., and Kessler, J.H. (2000). Flow and transport in fractured tuff at Yucca Mountain: Numerical experiments on fast preferential flow mechanisms. J. Contam. Hydrol., 43(3–4), 211–238.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MEA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment). (2005). Ecosystems and human well-being: Synthesis. Washington, DC: Island Press.
   Google Scholar
• Meisel, W.S., and Collins, D.C. (1973). Repro-Modeling: An approach to efficient model utilization and interpretation. IEEE Trans. Syst., Man, Cybern., Syst., 3(4), 349–358.
   Google Scholar
• Merritt, W. S., Letcher, R. A., and Jakeman, A. J. (2003). A review of erosion and sediment transport models. Environ. Model. Softw., 18(8), 761–799.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Messina, J.P., Evans, T.P., Manson, S.M., Shortridge, A.M., Deadman, P.J., and Verburg, P.H. (2008). Complex systems models and the management of error and uncertainty. J. Land. Use. Sci., 3(1), 11–25.
   Google Scholar
• Meyer, P.D., Rockhold, M.L., Gee, G.W., and Nicholson, T.J. (1997). Uncertainty analyses of infiltration and subsurface flow and transport for SDMP sites. Washington, DC: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Michaud, J., and Sorooshian, S. (1994). Comparison of simple versus complex distributed runoff models on a midsized semiarid watershed. Water Resour. Res., 30(3), 593–605.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mikailsoy, F., and Pachepsky Y. (2010). Average concentration of soluble salts in leached soils inferred from the convective-dispersive equation. Irrigation Sci., 28(5), 431–434.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mills, W.B., Cheng, J.J., Droppo, J.G., Faillace, E.R., Gnanapragasam, E.K., Johns, R.A., Laniak, G.F., Lew, C.S., Strenge, D.L., Sutherland, J.F., Whelan, G., and Yu, C. (1997). Multimedia benchmarking analysis for three risk assessment models: RESRAD, MMSOILS, and MEPAS. Risk Anal., 17(2), 187–202.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mohanty, B.P., Bowman, R.S., Hendrickx, J.M.H., and van Genuchten, M.Th. (1997). New piecewise-continuous hydraulic functions for modeling preferential flow in an intermittent flood-irrigated field. Water Resour. Res., 33, 2049–2063.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mugunthan, P., and Shoemaker, C.A. (2006). Assessing the impacts of parameter uncertainty for computationally expensive groundwater models. Water Resour. Res., 42, W10428.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mugunthan, P., Shoemaker, C.A., and Regis, R.G. (2005). Comparison of function approximation, heuristic, and derivative-based methods for automatic calibration of computationally expensive groundwater bioremediation models. Water Resour. Res., 41, W11427.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muhanna, W.A., and Pick, R.A. (1994). Meta-Modeling concepts and tools for model management: A systems approach. Manag. Sci., 40(9), 1093–1123.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muñoz-Carpena, R., Zajac, Z., & Kuo, Y. M. (2007). Global sensitivity and uncertainty analyses of the water quality model VFSMOD-W. Trans. ASABE, 50(5), 1719–1732.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Naorem, N., and Devi, Th.K. (2014). Estimation of potential evapotranspiration using empirical models for Imphal. IJITEE, 4(7), 119–123.
   Google Scholar
• NAS. (2009). Science and decisions: advancing risk assessment. Washington DC: The National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• Neuman, S.P., Wierenga, P.J., and Nicholson, T.J. (2003). A comprehensive strategy of hydrogeologic modeling and uncertainty analysis for nuclear facilities and sites. Washington, DC: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Nolan, B., Malone, R., Gronberg, J., Thorp, K., and Ma, L. (2012). Verifiable metamodels for nitrate losses to drains and groundwater in the Corn Belt, USA. Environ. Sci. Technol., 46, 901–908.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oreskes, N. (2003). The role of quantitative models in science. In C.D. Canham, J.J. Cole, and W.K. Lauenroth (Eds.), Models in ecosystem science ( Chapter 2, pp. 13–31). NJ, USA: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Oreskes, N., and Belitz, K. (2001). Philosophical issues in model assessment. In M.G. Anderson and P.D. Bates (Eds.), Model validation: Perspectives in hydrological science (pp. 23–41). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Ostfeld, A., and Salomons, S. (2005). A hybrid genetic-instance based learning algorithm for CE-QUAL-W2 calibration. J. Hydrol., 310, 122–142.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pachepsky, Y.A., Guber, A.K., Jacques, D., Simunek, J., Van Genuchten, M.T., Nicholson, T., and Cady, R. (2006a). Information content and complexity of simulated soil water fluxes. Geoderma, 134(3–4), 253–266.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pachepsky, Y.A., Guber, A.K., Van Genuchten, M.T., Nicholson, T.J., Cady, R.E., Simunek, J, and Schaap, M.G. (2006b). Model abstraction techniques for soil-water flow and transport. Washington, DC: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Pachepsky, Y.A., Guber, A.K., Van Genuchten, M.T., Simunek, J., Jacques, D., Nemes, A., Nicholson, T.J., and Cady, R.E. (2007). The multiplicity of flow and transport models in unsaturated zone – curse or blessing. In ZNS'07 (Vol. VIII, pp. 9–17), Vadose Zone Hydrol.
   Google Scholar
• Pachepsky, Y.A., Radcliffe, D.E., and Selim, H.M. (2003). Scaling methods in soil physics. Boca Raton, FL, USA: CRC Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pachepsky, Y.A., and Rawls, W. (2004). Development of pedotransfer functions in soil hydrology. Amsterdam: Elsevier B.V.
   Google Scholar
• Pachepsky, Y.A., Rawls, W. J., and Timlin, D. J. (1999). The current status of pedotransfer functions: Their accuracy, reliability, and utility in field- and regional-scale modeling. In D.L. Corwin, K. Loague, and T.R. Ellsworth (Eds.), Assessment of non-point source pollution in the vadose zone. Washington, DC: American Geophysical Union.
   Google Scholar
• Pachepsky, Y., Gish, T., Guber, A., Yakirevich, A., Kouznetsov, M., Van Genuchten, M., Nicholson, T., and Cady, R. (2011). Application of model abstraction techniques to simulate transport in soils. NUREG/CR-7026. Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research. Washington DC: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Pan, F., Pachepsky, Y.A., Guber, A.K., and Hill, R.L. (2011). Information and complexity measures applied to observed and simulated soil moisture time series. Hydrol. Sci. J., 56(6), 1027–1039.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Park, Y., Pachepsky, Y.A., Cho, K.H., Jeon, D. J., and Kim, J.H. (2015). Stressor-response modeling using the 2D water quality model and regression trees to predict chlorophyll-a in a reservoir system. J. Hydrol., 529(P3), 805–815.
   Google Scholar
• Parker, P., Letcher, R., Jakeman, A., Beck, M.B., Harris, G., Argent, R.M., Hare, M., Pahl-Wostl, C., Voinov, A., Janssen, M., Sullivan, P., Scoccimarro, M., Friend, A., Sonnenshein, M., Barker, D., Matejicek, L., Odulaja, D., Deadman, P., Lim, K., Larocque, G., Tarikhi, P., Fletcher, C., Put, A., Maxwell, T., Charles, A., Breeze, H., Nakatani, N., Mudgal, S., Naito, W., Osidele, O., Eriksson, I., Kautsky, U., Kautsky, E., Naeslund, B., Kumblad, L., Park, R., Maltagliati, S., Girardin, P., Rizzoli, A., Mauriello, D., Hoch, R., Pelletier, D., Reilly, J., Olafsdottir, R., and Bin, S. (2002). Progress in integrated assessment and modelling. Environ. Modell. Softw., 17(3), 209–217.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peckham, S.D., Hutton, E., and Norris, B. (2013). A component-based approach to integrated modeling in the geosciences: the design of CSMDS. Comput. Geosci., 53, 3–12.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pennington, D.D. (2007). Exploratory modeling of forest disturbance scenarios in central Oregon using computational experiments in GIS. Ecol. Inform., 2(4), 387–403.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perlis, A.J. (1982). Epigrams on programming. ACM SIGPLAN Notices, 17(9), 7–13.
   Google Scholar
• Perrin, C., Michel, C., and Andre, V. (2001). Does a large number of parameters enhance model performance? Comparative assessment of common catchment model structures on 429 catchments. J. Hydrol., 242, 275–301.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pianosi, F., Beven, K., Freer, J., Hall, J.W., Rougier, J., Stephenson, D.B., and Wagener, T. (2016). Sensitivity analysis of environmental models: A systematic review with practical workflow. Environ. Modell. Softw., 79, 214–232.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pianosi, F., Sarrazin, F., and Wagener, T. (2015). A Matlab toolbox for global sensitivity analysis. Environmental Modell. Softw., 70, 80–85.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pohlman, K.F., Hassan, A.E., and Chapman, J.B. (2002). Modeling density-driven flows and radionuclide transport at an underground nuclear test: Uncertainty analysis and effect of parameter correlation. Water Resour. Res., 385, 1059.
   Google Scholar
• Poli, R. (2013). A note on the difference between complicated and complex social systems. Cadmus, 2(1), 142.
   Google Scholar
• Popper, K. (1992). Simplicity. The logic of scientific discovery. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Qiu, H., Xu, Y., Gao, L., Li, X., and Chi, L. (2016). Multi-stage design space reduction and metamodeling optimization method based on self-organizing maps and fuzzy clustering. Expert. Syst. Appl., 46, 180–195.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rabitz, H. (1989). Systems analysis at the molecular scale. Science, 246(4927), 221–226.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ratto, M., Castelletti, A., and Pagano, A. (2012). Emulation techniques for the reduction and sensitivity analysis of complex environmental models. Environ. Modell. Softw., 34, 1–4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Razavi, S., Tolson, B.A., and Burn, D.H. (2012a). Numerical assessment of metamodelling strategies in computationally intensive optimization. Environ. Modell. Softw., 34, 67–86.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Razavi, S., Tolson, B.A., and Burn. D.H. (2012b). Review of surrogate modeling in water resources. Water Resour. Res., 48, W07401.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salt, J.D. (1993). Keynote address: Simulation should be easy and fun!, In G.W. Evans, M. Mollaghasemi, E.C. Russell, and W.E. Biles (Eds.), Proceedings of the 1993 winter simulation conference. Los Angeles, CA: Institute of Electrical and Electronics.
   Google Scholar
• Semenov, M.A., and Brooks, R.J. (1999). Spatial interpolation of the LARS-WG stochastic weather generator in Great Britain. Clim. Res., 11, 137–148.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skerjanec, M., Atanasova, N., Cerepnalkoski, D., Dzeroski, S., and Kompare, B. (2014). Development of a knowledge library for automated watershed modeling. Environ. Modell. Softw., 54, 60–72.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sober, E. (1981). The principle of parsimony. Brit. J. Phil. Sci., 32, 145–56.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stephens, P.A., Frey-Roos, F., Arnold, W., and Sutherland, W.J. (2002). Model complexity and population predictions. The alpine marmot as a case study. J. Anim. Ecol., 71(2), 343–361.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stillman, R.A., McGrorty, S., Goss-Custard., J.D., and West, A.D. (2000). Predicting mussel population density and age structure: The relationship between model complexity and predictive power. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser., 208, 131–145.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stillman, R. A., Railsback, S. F., Giske, J., Berger, U., and Grimm, V. (2015). Making predictions in a changing world: The benefits of individual-based ecology. BioScience, 65(2), 140–150.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tress, B., and Fry, G. (2005). Clarifying integrative research concepts in landscape ecology. Landsc. Ecol., 20(4), 479–493.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uusitalo, L., Lehikoinen, A., Helle, I., and Myrberg, K. (2015). An overview of methods to evaluate uncertainty of deterministic models in decision support. Environ. Modell. Softw., 63, 24–31.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van der Heijden, S., and Haberlandt, U. (2015). A fuzzy rule based metamodel for monthly catchment fate simulations. J. Hydrol., 531, 863–876.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Ittersum, M.K., Ewert, F., Heckelei, T., Wery, J., Olsson, J.A., Andersen, E., Bezlepkina, I., Brouwer, F., Donatelli, M., Flichman, G., Olsson, L., Rizzoli, A.E., van der Wal, T., Wien, J.E., and Wolf, J. (2008). Integrated assessment of agricultural systems e a component-based framework for the European Union (SEAMLESS). Agr. Syst., 96, 150–165.
   Google Scholar
• Van Ness, E.H., and Scheffer, M. (2005). A strategy to improve the contribution of complex simulation models to ecological theory. Ecol. Model., 185, 153–164.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Villa-Vialaneix, N., Follador, M., Ratto, M., and Leip, A. (2012). A comparison of eight metamodeling techniques for the simulation of N2O fluxes and N leaching from corn crops. Environ. Modell. Softw., 34, 51–66.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Voinov, A., and Bousquet, F. (2010). Modelling with stakeholders. Environ. Modell. Softw., 25(11), 1268–1281.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vollenweider, R.A. (1975). Input–output models with special reference to the phosphorus loading concept in limnology. Schweiz. Zeitsch. Hydrol., 37, 53–84.
   Google Scholar
• Wainwright, J., and Mulligan, M. (2004). Environmental modelling: Finding simplicity in complexity. London: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Walke, R.C., Longworth, J.K., Little, R.H., Venter, A., and Miller, B.W. (2004). The practical application of the AMBER software tool to support environmental decision making. In: Whelan, G. (Ed.). Brownfields: Multimedia modeling and assessment. Billerica, MA, USA: Computational Mechanics, Inc., and Southampton, UK: WIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wang, C.G., and Jamicson, D.G. (2002). An objective approach to regional wastewater treatment planning. Water Resour. Res., 38(3). doi:10.1029/2000WR000062
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ward, S.C. (1989). Arguments for constructively simple models. J. Oper. Res. Soc., 40, 141–153.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Washington, W.M., Buja, L., and Craig, A. (2009). The computational future for climate and earth system models: on the path to petaflop and beyond. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A., 367(1890), 833–846.
   Google Scholar
• Watson, T. A., Doherty, J.E., and Christensen, S. (2013), Parameter and predictive outcomes of model simplification. Water Resour. Res., 49, 3952–3977, doi:10.1002/wrcr.20145.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whelan, G., Kim, K., Pelton, M.A., Castleton, K.J., Laniak, G.F., Wolf, K., Parmar, R., Galvin, M., and Babindreier, J. (2014a). Design of a component-based integrated environmental modeling framework. Environ. Modell. Softw., 55, 1–24.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whelan, G., Kim, K., Pelton, M.A., Soller, J.A., Castleton, K.J., Molina, M., Pachepsky, Y., Ravenscroft, J., and Zepp, R. (2014b). An integrated environmental modeling framework for performing quantitative microbial risk assessments. Environ. Modell. Softw., 55, 77–91.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whelan, G., and Laniak, G.F. (1998). A risk-based approach for a national assessment. In C.H. Benson, J.N. Meegoda, R.B. Gilbert, and S.P. Clemence (Eds.), Risk-based corrective action and Brownfields restorations, Geotechnical Special Publication Number 82. Reston, VA: American Society of Civil Engineers.
   Google Scholar
• Whelan, G., Wurstner, S.K., and Taira, R.Y. (2002). Comparing semi analytical and numerical groundwater contaminant transport modeling. In G.H. Leavesley, and D. Frevert (Eds.), Proceedings of the Second Federal Interagency Hydrologic Modeling Conference, Las Vegas, Nevada ( PNNL-SA-36519), July 28–August 1, 2002. Richland, Washington, DC: Pacific Northwest National Laboratory.
   Google Scholar
• Wood, E.F., Roundy, J.K., Troy, T.J., van Beek, L.P.H., Bierkens, M.F.P., Blyth, E., de Roo, A., D¨oll, P., Ek, M., Famiglietti, J., Gochis, D., van de Giesen, N., Houser, P., Jaff´e, P.R., Kollet, S., Lehner, B., Lettenmaier, D.P., Peters-Lidard, C., Sivapalan, M., Sheffield, J., Wade, A., and Whitehead, P. (2011). Hyperresolution global land surface modeling: Meeting a grand challenge for monitoring Earth's terrestrial water. Water Resour. Res., 47, W05301. doi:10.1029/2010WR010090.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yan, S.Q., and Minsker, B. (2006). Optimal groundwater remediation design using an adaptive neural network genetic algorithm. Water Resour. Res., 42, W05407.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yilmaz, L., and Ören, T.I. (2004). Dynamic “model updating in simulation with multimodels: A taxonomy and a generic agent-based architecture,” In Proceedings of SCSC 2004 – Summer Computer Simulation Conference (pp. 3–8).
   Google Scholar
• Zartarian, V., Xue, J., Glen, G., Smith, L., Tulve, N., and Tornero-Velez, R. (2012). Quantifying children's aggregate (dietary and residential) exposure and dose to permethrin: application and evaluation of EPA's probabilistic SHEDSmultimedia model. J. Expo. Sci. Environ. Epidemiol., 22(3), 267–273.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zeigler, B. (1976). Theory of modeling and simulation. New York, NY: Wiley and Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Zeigler, B.P., Kim, T.G., and Praehofer, H. (1998). Theory of modeling and simulation (2nd ed.), New York, NY: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Zhou, Y., and Li, W. (2011). A review of regional groundwater flow modeling. Geosci. Front., 2(2), 205–214.
   Google Scholar