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, Ryan Teuling

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/Letter to the editorAcademicpeer-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
JournalWater Resources Research
Volume53
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2017

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