Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Conceptual model uncertainty and parameter uncertainty are dominant contributors to the total uncertainty of a radioecological model output. In the present study the focus is on conceptual model uncertainty, which is often not acknowledged. Conceptual model uncertainty is assessed by subtracting from the total uncertainty of the model output the propagated parameter uncertainty, obtained by means of Bayesian inference analysis. The conceptual model uncertainty is quantified for two process-based models, which describe the interception of wet deposited pollutants under equilibrium and kinetic conditions, respectively. The natural variability due the chemical valence of the elements considered is accounted for in both models. Quantitative evidence has been obtained that the conceptual model uncertainty can contribute to the total uncertainty budget of the models for interception of wet deposited pollutants at least as much as, if not more than, parameter uncertainty.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/risa.13807 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!