nach oben

Erschienen in:

2024 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

10. Uncertainty Analysis in Hydrologic Modelling

verfasst von : Vijay P. Singh, Rajendra Singh, Pranesh Kumar Paul, Deepak Singh Bisht, Srishti Gaur

Erschienen in: Hydrological Processes Modelling and Data Analysis

Verlag: Springer Nature Singapore

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Hydrologic models differ regarding hydrologic processes, their parameters, inputs and outputs. Consequently, the results of different models for a particular period for a study area also differ. Uncertainty sources of hydrologic predictions are divided into three groups: uncertainties due to model parameters, uncertainties due to model structure and uncertainties due to observation data (for input and calibration). Another source is the uncertainty generated from boundary conditions, i.e., scenario uncertainty. Different uncertainty analysis techniques are reviewed and summarised to identify which is more appropriate for analysing a particular hydrologic modelling uncertainty. Finally, research prospects on uncertainty analysis of hydrologic modelling are proposed.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Vorheriges Kapitel Machine Learning (ML) in Water Resources

Nächstes Kapitel Emerging Fields in Hydrology

Abbaspour KC, Johnson CA, Genuchten MT (2004) Estimating uncertain flow and transport parameters using a sequential uncertainty fitting procedure. Vadose Zone J 3(4):1340–1352CrossRef

Abbaspour KC, Yang J, Maximov I, Siber R, Bogner K, Mieleitner J et al (2007) Spatially distributed modelling of hydrology and water quality in the pre-alpine/alpine Thur watershed using SWAT. J Hydrol 333:413–430CrossRef

Ajami NK, Duan QY, Sorooshian S (2007) An integrated hydrologic Bayesian multimodel combination framework: confronting input, parameter, and model structural uncertainty in hydrologic prediction. Water Resour Res 43:W01403CrossRef

Akaike H (1974) A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Trans Automat 19:716–723CrossRef

Allaire JJ, Xie Y, McPherson J, Luraschi J, Ushey K, Atkins A et al (2019) Dynamic documents for R. R package version 114. https://CRANR-project.org/package=rmarkdown

Balin D, Lee H, Rode M (2010) Is point uncertain rainfall likely to have a great impact on distributed complex hydrological modeling? Water Resour Res 46:W11520CrossRef

Bates BC, Campbell EP (2001) A Markov chain Monte Carlo scheme for parameter estimation and inference in conceptual rainfall-runoff modeling. Water Resour Res 37:937–947CrossRef

Bengtsson H (2018) matrixStats: functions that apply to rows and columns of matrices (and to vectors). R package version 0540. https://CRANRproject.org/package=matrixStats

Beven KJ (2012) Rainfall-runoff modeling: the primer, 2nd edn. Wiley-Blackwell, pp 1–18

Beven KJ (2016) EGU Leonardo lecture: facets of hydrology–epistemic error, non-stationarity, likelihood, hypothesis testing, and communication. Hydrol Sci J 61(9):1652–1665CrossRef

Beven K, Binley A (1992) The future of distributed models—model calibration and uncertainty prediction. Hydrol Process 6:279–298CrossRef

Beven K, Young P (2013) A guide to good practice in modeling semantics for authors and referees. Water Resour Res 49:5092–5098. https://doi.org/10.1002/wrcr.20393

Blasone RS, Vrugt JA, Madsen H (2008) Generalized likelihood uncertainty estimation (GLUE) using adaptive Markov Chain Monte Carlo sampling. Adv Water Resour 31:630–648CrossRef

Braak CA (2006) Markov Chain Monte Carlo version of the genetic algorithm Differential Evolution: easy Bayesian computing for real parameter spaces. Stat Comput 16:239–249CrossRef

Bredehoeft J (2005) The conceptualization model problem—surprise. Hydrogeol J 13:37–46CrossRef

Brownrigg R, Minka TP, Deckmyn A (2018) maps: draw geographical maps. R package version 330. https://CRANR-project.org/package=maps

Constantine P, Diaz P (2017) Global sensitivity metrics from active subspaces. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 162:1–13CrossRef

Coron L, Thirel G, Delaigue O, Perrin C, Andréassian V (2017) The suite of lumped GR hydrological models in an R package. Environ Model Softw 94:166–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2017.05.002

Coron L, Delaigue O, Thirel G, Perrin C, Michel C (2019) airGR: suite of GR hydrological models for precipitation-runoff modelling. R package version 13223. https://CRANR-project.org/package=airGR

Dowle M, Srinivasan A (2019) datatable: extension of ‘dataframe’. R package version 1122. https://CRANR-project.org/package=datatable

Draper D (1995) Assessment and propagation of model uncertainty. J R Stat Soc Ser B Stat Methodol 57:45–97

Duan QY, Sorooshian S, Gupta HV (1992) Effective and efficient global optimization for conceptual rainfall-runoff models. Water Resour Res 28:1015–1031CrossRef

Erdal D, Cirpka O (2019) Global sensitivity analysis and adaptive stochastic sampling of a subsurface-flow model using active subspaces. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci Discuss 23(9):3787–3805CrossRef

Erdal D, Cirpka O (2020) Improved sampling of behavioral subsurface flow model parameters using active subspaces. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci Discuss 24(9):4567–4574CrossRef

Fienen MN, Hunt RJ (2015) High-throughput computing versus high-performance computing for groundwater applications. Groundwater 53(2):180–184CrossRef

Foglia L, Mehl SW, Hill MC, Burlando P (2013) Evaluating model structure adequacy: the case of the Maggia Valley groundwater system southern Switzerland Key Points. Water Resour Res 49(1):260–282. https://doi.org/10.1029/2011WR011779

Gelfand AE, Hills SE, Racine-Poon A (1990) Illustration of Bayesian inference in normal data models using Gibbs sampling. JASA 85:972–985CrossRef

Haario H, Saksman E, Tamminen J (1999) Adaptive proposal distribution for random walk Metropolis algorithm. Comput Stat 14:375–395CrossRef

Haario H, Saksman E, Tamminen J (2001) An adaptive Metropolis algorithm. Bernoulli 7:223–242CrossRef

Hannan EJ, Quinn BG (1979) The determination of the order of an auto-regression. J R Stat Soc B Stat Methodol 41:190–195

Harp DR, Vesselinov VV (2012) Analysis of hydrogeological structure uncertainty by estimation of hydrogeological acceptance probability of geostatistical models. Adv Water Resour 36:64–74CrossRef

Hassan AE, Bekhit HM, Chapman JB (2008) Uncertainty assessment of a stochastic hydrologic flow model using GLUE analysis. J Hydrol 362:89–109CrossRef

Hassan AE, Bekhit HM, Chapman JB (2009) Using Markov Chain Monte Carlo to quantify parameter uncertainty and its effect on predictions of a hydrologic flow model. Environ Model Softw 24:749–763CrossRef

Hastings WK (1970) Monte Carlo sampling methods using Markov chains and their applications. Biometrika 57:97–109CrossRef

Helton J, Hansen C, Sallaberry C (2012) Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis in performance assessment for the proposed high-level radioactive waste repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 107:44–63CrossRef

Hurvich CM, Tsai CL (1989) Regression and time series model selection in small samples. Biometrika 76:297–307CrossRef

Jefferson J, Gilbert J, Constantine P, Maxwell R (2015) Active subspaces for sensitivity analysis and dimension reduction of an integrated hydrologic model. Comput Geosci 83:127–138CrossRef

Kashyap RL (1982) Optimal choice of AR and MA parts in autoregressive moving average models. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 4:99–104CrossRef

Kass RE, Raftery AE (1995) Bayes factors. JASA 90:773–795CrossRef

Kavetski D, Kuczera G, Franks SW (2006a) Bayesian analysis of input uncertainty in hydrological modeling: 1 Theory. Water Resour Res 42:W03407

Kavetski D, Kuczera G, Franks SW (2006b) Bayesian analysis of input uncertainty in hydrological modeling: 2 Application. Water Resour Res 42:W0340

Khu S, Werner M (2003) Reduction of Monte-Carlo simulation runs for uncertainty estimation in hydrological modelling. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 7(5):680–692CrossRef

Koenker RW (2019) quantreg: quantile regression. R package version 551. https://CRANR-project.org/package=quantreg

Koenker R, Bassett G (1978) Regression quantiles. Econometrica 46(1):33–50. https://doi.org/10.2307/1913643

Koenker R, Hallock KF (2001) Quantile regression. J Econ Perspect 15(4):143–156. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.15.4.143

Krzysztofowicz R (1999) Bayesian theory of probabilistic forecasting via deterministic hydrologic model. Water Resour Res 35(9):2739–2750CrossRef

Kuczera G (1997) Efficient subspace probabilistic parameter optimization for catchment models. Water Resour Res 33(1):177–185CrossRef

Kuczera G, Renard B, Thyer M, Kavetski D (2010) There are no hydrological monsters, just models and observations with large uncertainties! Hydrol Sci J 55(6):980–991CrossRef

Kumar R, Singh RD, Sharma KD (2005) Water resources of India. Curr Sci 89(10):794–811

Kumar A, Singh R, Jena PP, Chatterjee C, Mishra A (2015) Identification of the best multimodel combination for simulating river discharge. J Hydrol 525:313–325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.03.060

Kurtz W, Lapin A, Schilling O, Tang Q, Schiller E, Braun T et al (2017) Integrating hydrological modelling, data assimilation and cloud computing for real-time management of water resources. Environ Model Softw 93:418–435CrossRef

Laloy E, Vrugt JA (2012) High-dimensional posterior exploration of hydrologic models using multiple try DREAM_(ZS) and high-performance computing. Water Resour Res 48:W01526CrossRef

Mantovan P, Todini E (2006) Hydrological forecasting uncertainty assessment: incoherence of the GLUE methodology. J Hydrol 330:368–381CrossRef

Mantovan P, Todini E, Martina MLV (2007) Reply to comment by Keith Beven, Paul Smith and Jim Freer on “Hydrological forecasting uncertainty assessment: incoherence of the GLUE methodology.” J Hydrol 338:319–324CrossRef

Marshall L, Nott D, Sharma A (2004) A comparative study of Markov chain Monte Carlo methods for conceptual rainfall-runoff modeling. Water Resour Res 40:W02501CrossRef

Merz B, Thieken AH (2009) Flood risk curves and uncertainty bounds. Nat Hazards 51:437–458CrossRef

Metropolis N, Rosenbluth A, Rosenbluth M, Teller A, Teller E (1953) Equation of state calculations by fast computing machines. J Chem Phys 21(6):1087–1092CrossRef

Montanari A (2007) What do we mean by ‘uncertainty’? The need for a consistent wording about uncertainty assessment in hydrology. Hydrol Process 21:841–845CrossRef

Neuman SP (2003) Maximum likelihood Bayesian averaging of uncertain model predictions. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 17:291–305CrossRef

Neuman SP, Wierenga PJ (2003) A comprehensive strategy of hydrogeologic modeling and uncertainty analysis for nuclear facilities and sites NUREG/CR-6805. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC

Papacharalampous GA, Koutsoyiannis D, Montanari A (2019) Quantification of predictive uncertainty in hydrological modelling by harnessing the wisdom of the crowd: methodology development and investigation using toy models. Adv Water Resour 136:103471. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2019.103471

Pappenberger F, Beven KJ (2006) Ignorance is bliss: or seven reasons not to use uncertainty analysis. Water Resour Res 42:W05302. https://doi.org/10.1029/2005WR004820

Paul PK, Gaur S, Kumari B, Panigrahy N, Mishra A, Singh R (2019) Diagnosing credibility of a large-scale conceptual hydrological model in simulating streamflow. J Hydrol Eng (ASCE) 24(4):4019004. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0001766

Paul PK, Zhang Y, Ma N, Mishra A, Panigrahy N, Singh R (2021) Selecting hydrological models for developing countries: perspective of global, continental, and country scale models over catchment scale models. J Hydrol 600:126561. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2021.126561

Peterson RA (2017) Estimating normalization transformations with best normalize. https://github.com/petersonR/bestNormalize

Peterson RA (2019) bestNormalize: normalizing transformation functions. R package version 140. https://CRANR-project.org/package=bestNormalize

Plummer M, Best N, Cowles K, Vines K (2006) CODA: convergence diagnosis and output analysis for MCMC. R News 6(1):7–11

Plummer M, Best N, Cowles K, Vines K, Sarkar D, Bates D et al (2019) CODA: output analysis and diagnostics for MCMC. R package version 019-3. https://CRANR-project.org/package=coda

Poeter E, Anderson D (2005) Multimodel ranking and inference in ground water modeling. Groundwater 43:597–605CrossRef

Post J, Hattermann FF, Krysanova V (2008) Parameter and input data uncertainty estimation for the assessment of long-term soil organic carbon dynamics. Environ Model Softw 23:125–138CrossRef

R Core Team (2019) R: a language and environment for statistical computing R. Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://wwwR-project.org

Raftery AE, Gneiting T, Balabdaoui F (2005) Using Bayesian model averaging to calibrate forecast ensembles. Mon Weather Rev 133:1155–1174CrossRef

Refsgaard JC, van der Sluijs JP, Brown J (2006) A framework for dealing with uncertainty due to model structure error. Adv Water Resour 29:1586–1597CrossRef

Renard B, Kavetski D, Kuczera G (2009) Comment on “An integrated hydrologic Bayesian multimodel combination framework: confronting input, parameter, and model structural uncertainty in hydrologic prediction” by Newsha K Ajami et al. Water Resour Res 45:W03603

Renard B, Kavetski D, Thyer M, Kuczera G, Franks SW (2010) Understanding predictive uncertainty in hydrologic modeling: the challenge of identifying input and structural errors. Water Resour Res 46:W05521. https://doi.org/10.1029/2009WR008328

Rojas R, Feyen L, Dassargues A (2008) Conceptual model uncertainty in hydrologic modeling: combining generalized likelihood uncertainty estimation and Bayesian model averaging. Water Resour Res 44:W12418CrossRef

Rojas R, Feyen L, Dassargues A (2009) Sensitivity analysis of prior model probabilities and the value of prior knowledge in the assessment of conceptual model uncertainty in hydrologic modeling. Hydrol Process 23:1131–1146CrossRef

Rojas R, Feyen L, Batelaan O (2010a) On the value of conditioning data to reduce conceptual model uncertainty in hydrologic modeling. Water Resour Res 46:W08520CrossRef

Rojas R, Kahunde S, Peeters L (2010b) Application of a multimodel approach to account for conceptual model and scenario uncertainties in hydrologic modelling. J Hydrol 394:416–435CrossRef

Schwarz G (1978) Estimating the dimension of a model. Ann Stat 6:461–464CrossRef

Singh VP, Frevert DK (eds) (2006) Watershed models. Taylor and Francis

Singh A, Mishra S, Ruskauff G (2010) Model averaging techniques for quantifying conceptual model uncertainty. Groundwater 48:701–715CrossRef

Soetaert K, Petzoldt T (2010) Inverse modelling, sensitivity and Monte Carlo analysis in R using package FME. J Stat Softw 33(3):1–28. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v033.i03

Soetaert K, Petzoldt T (2016) FME: a flexible modelling environment for inverse modelling, sensitivity, identifiability and Monte Carlo analysis. R package version 135. https://CRANR-project.org/package=FME

Teukolsky S, Flannery B, Press W, Vetterling W (1992) Numerical recipes in C. SMR 693:59–70

Thiemann M, Trosset M, Gupta H (2001) Bayesian recursive parameter estimation for hydrologic models. Water Resour Res 37:2521–2535CrossRef

Todini E (2007) Hydrological catchment modelling: past, present and future. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 11(1):468–482CrossRef

Troldborg M, Nowak W, Tuxen N (2010) Uncertainty evaluation of mass discharge estimates from a contaminated site using a fully Bayesian framework. Water Resour Res 46:W12552CrossRef

Tsai FTC, Li X (2008) Inverse hydrologic modeling for hydraulic conductivity estimation using Bayesian model averaging and variance window. Water Resour Res 44:W09434CrossRef

Tyralis H, Papacharalampous GA, Burnetas A, Langousis A (2019) Hydrological post-processing using stacked generalization of quantile regression algorithms: largescale application over CONUS. J Hydrol 577:123957. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2019.123957

Van Griensven A, Meixner T (2006) Methods to quantify and identify the sources of uncertainty for river basin water quality models. Water Sci Technol 53(1):51–59CrossRef

Van Griensven A, Meixner T, Grunwald S, Bishop T, Diluzio A, Srinivasan R (2006) A global sensitivity analysis tool for the parameters of multi-variable catchment models. J Hydrol 324(1–4):10–23CrossRef

Vema V, Sudheer K (2020) Towards quick parameter estimation of hydrological models with large number of computational units. J Hydrol 587:124983CrossRef

Vitolo C (2017) hddtools: hydrological data discovery tools. J Open Source Softw 2(9). https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.00056

Vitolo C (2018) hddtools: hydrological data discovery tools. R package version 082. https://CRANR-project.org/package=hddtools

Vrugt JA (2011) DREAM_(D): an adaptive Markov chain Monte Carlo simulation algorithm to solve discrete, noncontinuous, posterior parameter estimation problems. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 8:4025–4052

Vrugt JA, Gupta HV, Bouten W (2003) A shuffled complex evolution metropolis algorithm for optimization and uncertainty assessment of hydrologic model parameters. Water Resour Res 39:1201CrossRef

Vrugt JA, ter Braak CJF, Diks CGH (2009) Accelerating Markov chain Monte Carlo simulation by differential evolution with self-adaptive randomized subspace sampling. Int J Nonlinear Sci Numer Simul 10:273–290CrossRef

Warnes GR, Bolker B, Gorjanc G, Grothendieck G, Korosec A, Lumley T et al (2017) gdata: various R programming tools for data manipulation. R package version 2180. https://CRANR-project.org/package=gdata

Weerts AH, Winsemius HC, Verkade JS (2011) Estimation of predictive hydrological uncertainty using quantile regression: examples from the national flood forecasting system (England and Wales). Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 15(1):255–265. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-15-255-2011

White J, Hunt R, Fienen M, Doherty J (2020) Approaches to highly parameterized inversion: PEST++ version 5, a software suite for parameter estimation, uncertainty analysis, management optimization and sensitivity analysis. Technical report, US Geological Survey

Wickham H (2007) Reshaping data with the reshape package. J Stat Softw 21(12):1–20CrossRef

Wickham H (2011) The split-apply-combine strategy for data analysis. J Stat Softw 40(1):1–29CrossRef

Wickham H (2016a) ggplot2. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24277-4

Wickham H (2016b) plyr: tools for splitting, applying and combining data. R package version 184. https://CRANR-project.org/package=plyr

Wickham H (2018) reshape: flexibly reshape data. R package version 088. https://CRANR-project.org/package=reshape

Wickham H, Henry L (2019) tidyr: easily tidy data with ‘spread()’ and ‘gather()’ functions. R package version 083. https://CRANR-project.org/package=tidyr

Wickham H, Chang W, Henry L, Pedersen TL, Takahashi K, Wilke C et al (2019a) ggplot2: create elegant data visualisations using the grammar of graphics

Wickham H, François R, Henry L, Müller K (2019b) dplyr: a grammar of data manipulation. R package version 083. https://CRANR-project.org/package=dplyr

Wickham H, Hester J, Chang W (2019c) devtools: tools to make developing R packages easier. R package version 210. https://CRANRproject.org/package=devtools

Wilke CO (2018) ggridges: ridgeline plots in ‘ggplot2’. R package version 051. https://CRANR-project.org/package=ggridges

Wilson M, Barnard R, Gauthier J (1994) Total-system performance assessment for Yucca Mountain–SNL second iteration (TSPA-1993). Technical report, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico

Xie Y (2014) knitr: a comprehensive tool for reproducible research in R. In: Stodden V, Leisch F, Peng RD (eds) Implementing reproducible computational research. Chapman and Hall/CRC

Xie Y (2015) Dynamic documents with R and knitr, 2nd edn. Chapman and Hall

Xie Y (2019) knitr: a general-purpose package for dynamic report generation in R. R package version 124. https://CRANR-project.org/package=knitr

Xue C, Chen B, Wu H (2014) Parameter uncertainty analysis of surface flow and sediment yield in the Huolin basin, China. J Hydrol Eng 19(6):1224–1236. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0000909

Ye M (2010) MMA: a computer code for multimodel analysis. Groundwater 48:9–12CrossRef

Ye M, Neuman SP, Meyer PD (2004) Maximum likelihood Bayesian averaging of spatial variability models in unsaturated fractured tuff. Water Resour Res 40:W05113CrossRef

Ye M, Pohlmann KF, Chapman JB (2010) A model-averaging method for assessing hydrologic conceptual model uncertainty. Groundwater 48:716–728CrossRef

Yen BC, Cheng ST, Melching CS (1986) Stochastic and risk analysis in hydraulic engineering. Water Resources Publications

Yoon H, Hart DB, McKenna SA (2013) Parameter estimation and predictive uncertainty in stochastic inverse modeling of hydrologic flow: comparing null-space Monte Carlo and multiple starting point methods. Water Resour Res 49:536–553CrossRef

Yustres A, Asensio L, Alonso J (2012) A review of Markov chain Monte Carlo and information theory tools for inverse problems in subsurface flow. Comput Geosci 16:1–20CrossRef

Zadeh LA (2005) Toward a generalized theory of uncertainty (GTU)––an outline. J Inf Sci 172:1–40CrossRef

Zeileis A, Grothendieck G (2005) zoo: S3 infrastructure for regular and irregular time series. J Stat Softw 14(6):1–27. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v014.i06

Zeileis A, Grothendieck G, Ryan JA (2019) zoo: S3 infrastructure for regular and irregular time series (Z’s ordered observations). R package version 18-6. https://CRANR-project.org/package=zoo

Zeng XK, Wang D, Wu JC (2012) Sensitivity analysis of the probability distribution of hydrologic level series based on information entropy. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 26:345–356CrossRef

Titel: Uncertainty Analysis in Hydrologic Modelling
verfasst von: Vijay P. Singh
Rajendra Singh
Pranesh Kumar Paul
Deepak Singh Bisht
Srishti Gaur
Verlag: Springer Nature Singapore
Buch: Hydrological Processes Modelling and Data Analysis
Print ISBN: 978-981-9713-15-8

Electronic ISBN: 978-981-9713-16-5

Copyright-Jahr: 2024
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-1316-5_10

Premium Partner

Marktübersichten

Die im Laufe eines Jahres in der „adhäsion“ veröffentlichten Marktübersichten helfen Anwendern verschiedenster Branchen, sich einen gezielten Überblick über Lieferantenangebote zu verschaffen.

Zur Marktübersicht