Comment on “Most computational hydrology is not reproducible, so is it really science?” by Christopher Hutton et al.

Lieke A. Melsen, Paul J.J.F. Torfs, Remko Uijlenhoet, Adriaan J. Teuling

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/Letter to the editorScientificpeer-review

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We discuss two definitions of reproducibility, and question if both definitions are required to be met in computational hydrological studies.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)2568-2569
Number of pages2
JournalWater Resources Research
Volume53
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2017
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • computational hydrology
  • repeatability
  • reproducibility

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Comment on “Most computational hydrology is not reproducible, so is it really science?” by Christopher Hutton et al.'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this