On doing better hydrological science
On doing better hydrological science
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/hyp.7108
复制
发表时间：
2008-08
影响因子：
3.2
通讯作者：
K. Beven
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
K. Beven
2年前，我在EGU 2006上回应了关于不确定性估计的讨论，并发表了评论“论破坏科学”（OUTS），并建议水文过程应该成为第一个坚持所有提交的论文都应该包括测量和建模结果的不确定性分析的水文期刊（Beven，2006 a）。这一评论引起了许多不同的反应（霍尔等人，2007; Andreassian等人，二○ ○七年;蒙塔纳里，2007年; Todini和Mantovan，2007年; Sivakumar，2008年），希望讨论能够继续下去，以便水文界能够反思所提出的问题（尽管在对提交的论文施加要求方面一直保持沉默！）。吉姆·巴特尔现在要求我对OUTS的评论提供一个评论，以进一步反思。
It is now 2 years since I responded to a discussion about uncertainty estimation at EGU2006 with the commentary 'On Undermining the Science' (OUTS) and the suggestion that Hydrological Processes should become the first hydrological journal to insist that all the papers submitted should include an uncertainty analysis of both measurements and modelling results (Beven, 2006a). That commentary provoked a number of varied responses (Hall et al., 2007; Andreassian et al., 2007; Montanari, 2007; Todini and Mantovan, 2007; Sivakumar, 2008) and the discussion should hopefully continue so that the hydrological community can reflect on the issues raised (though there has been a notable silence all round about imposing a requirement on submitted papers!). Jim Buttle has now asked me to provide a commentary on the commentaries of the OUTS commentary to further this reflection.