Abstract

The finding of important explanatory variables for the location and scale parameters of the generalized extreme value (GEV) distribution, when the latter is used for the modelling of annual streamflow maxima, is known to have reduced the uncertainties in inferences, as estimated through regional flood frequency analysis frameworks. However, important explanatory variables have not been found for the GEV shape parameter, despite its critical significance, which stems from the fact that it determines the behaviour of the upper tail of the distribution. Here we examine the nature of the shape parameter by revealing its relationships with basin attributes. We use a dataset that comprises information about daily streamflow and forcing, climatic indices, topographic, land cover, soil and geological characteristics of 591 basins with minimal human influence in the contiguous United States. We propose a framework that uses random forests and linear models to find (a) important predictor variables of the shape parameter and (b) an interpretable model with high predictive performance. The process of study comprises of assessing the predictive performance of the models, selecting a parsimonious predicting model and interpreting the results in an ad-hoc manner. The findings suggest that the median of the shape parameter is 0.19, the shape parameter mostly depends on climatic indices, while the selected prediction model is a linear one and results in more than 20% higher accuracy in terms of RMSE compared to a naïve approach. The implications are important, since it is shown that incorporating the regression model into regional flood frequency analysis frameworks can considerably reduce the predictive uncertainties.

Highlights

  • 1.1 Flood frequency analysis and hydrological signaturesFloods are one of the most important natural hazards, with a large part of the hydrological literature being devoted to their study

  • The shape parameter of the generalized extreme value distribution of daily annual block maxima of streamflow is important because it is related to how extreme the floods are

  • It should be attentively examined with the aim to reduce its high impact on uncertainty, when incorporated in statistical models of extremes

Read more

Summary

Introduction

1.1 Flood frequency analysis and hydrological signatures. Floods are one of the most important natural hazards (see e.g. Odry and Arnaud 2017), with a large part of the hydrological literature being devoted to their study (see e.g. Parkes and Demeritt 2016). Flood frequency analysis (FFA) is a statistical approach aiming at determining the magnitude of floods for a predefined return period (Thorarinsdottir et al 2018). When at-site data are limited, the models’ results can be very uncertain. Information from adjacent or similar sites can be exploited. This approach is termed regional flood frequency analysis (RFFA, Thorarinsdottir et al 2018). A more detailed classification of the RFFA models can be found in Odry and Arnaud (2017)

Objectives
Findings
Discussion
Conclusion
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.