Abstract

The effects of daily‐read discharges, discharges derived from a single daily observation (say at 9 AM), are examined in the context of flood frequency analysis. These discharges underestimate the true peak discharge because the actual peak is unlikely to occur at the single observation time. The resultant error in discharge estimates can be quite large, up to a factor of 10. Several maximum likelihood methods are proposed to deal with these daily‐read, or censored, discharges. Three methods are evaluated: censored as gauged (CAG), which treats daily‐read discharges as the true peak, binomial censoring (BC), which uses binomial censoring, and random dependent censoring (RDC), which incorporates the dependence between the the daily‐read and true peak discharges. The performance of the methods is evaluated using a Monte Carlo study. The RDC method is found preferable to the CAG method because it provides better performance (in terms of root mean squared error and bias) and is theoretically sound. The BC method performs very poorly and is not recommended.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.