4.6 Review

Groundwater Management and Allocation Models: A Review

期刊

WATER
卷 15, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/w15020253

关键词

groundwater management; review; predictive modeling; optimization model; uncertainty analysis; conflict resolution; game theory

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study presents a review and bibliometric analysis of popular techniques in groundwater management and allocation models. The literature is categorized into four sectors: simulation and surrogate models, classic and smart optimization models, uncertainty analysis techniques, and decision-making models. The study concludes with a summary and goals for future research.
Effective groundwater management and allocation are essential from economic and social points of view due to increasing high-quality water demands. This study presents a review and bibliometric analysis of the popular techniques in groundwater management and allocation models, which have not yet been captured in the literature, as our knowledge allows. To this extent, the literature on this state-of-the-art is categorized based on four primary sectors intervening in efficient groundwater management. The first sector discusses the simulation and surrogate models as the central groundwater predictive models, wherein quantitative and qualitative groundwater models are scrutinized. The second section is dedicated to applying different classic and smart optimization models, followed by a summary of state-of-the-art works on applying accurate and heuristic optimization models in groundwater management. Third, uncertainty analysis techniques in conjunction with groundwater modeling are studied as analytical tools, approximation methods, and simulation methods to identify the most exciting subject fields. The fourth section reviews decision-making models coupled with groundwater models as multi-criteria decision-making, social choice, and game-theory models. Finally, a summary of this review and goals for future studies are presented. Additionally, several new ideas are recognized, advising scholars to find critical gaps in the field.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据