Doi.org/10.1002/2016WR019285
Revision as of 13:38, 17 August 2022 by 187.21.138.9 (talk) (Created page with "== Target Article == Most computational hydrology is not reproducible, so is it really science?; Hutton, C., T. Wagener, J. Freer, D. Han, C. Duffy, and B. Arheimer ; Water Resour. Res.; 2016; https://doi.org/10.1002/2016WR019285 == Article providing comments == Comment on “Most computational hydrology is not reproducible, so is it really science?” by Christopher Hutton et al.; Añel, Juan A.; ; Water Resources Research; 2017-3-01 https://doi.org/10.1002/2016wr020190...")
Target ArticleEdit
Most computational hydrology is not reproducible, so is it really science?; Hutton, C., T. Wagener, J. Freer, D. Han, C. Duffy, and B. Arheimer ; Water Resour. Res.; 2016; https://doi.org/10.1002/2016WR019285
Article providing commentsEdit
Comment on “Most computational hydrology is not reproducible, so is it really science?” by Christopher Hutton et al.; Añel, Juan A.; ; Water Resources Research; 2017-3-01 https://doi.org/10.1002/2016wr020190
SummaryEdit
Note: Opened to append information.