Tests of peak flow scaling in simulated self-similar river networks

By M. Menabde, S. Veitzer, Vijay K. Gupta, Murugesu Sivapalan. 2001

60 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Are American rivers Tokunaga self‐similar? New results on fluvial network topology and its climatic dependence (2013, background): “For example, the observed scaling relationships between hydrologic (e.g., annual peak flow) and geomorphic (e.g., drainage area, width function peak) variables have been frequently studied through ensemble simulations of synthetic river networks [e.g.,Menadbe et al., 2001; Veitzer and Gupta, 2001].”
Connecting the power-law scaling structure of peak-discharges to spatially variable rainfall and catchment physical properties (2014, background): “They relaxed the assumption of instantaneous delivery of hillslope runoff to channel links [12–14,20,22] and replaced it with a realistic hillslope overland flow velocity.”
Area and width functions of river networks: New results on multifractal properties (2007, background): “…functions in efforts to understand, via hydrologic simulation or theoretical derivations, the physical origin of the scaling of floods as arising from the known scaling structure of rainfall and the known fractal properties of river networks [e.g., Menabde et al., 2001; Troutman and Over, 2001].”