Loading…
Robust flood frequency analysis: Performance of EMA with multiple Grubbs‐Beck outlier tests
Flood frequency analysis generally involves the use of simple parametric probability distributions to smooth and extrapolate the information provided by short flood records to estimate extreme flood flow quantiles. Parametric probability distributions can have difficulty simultaneously fitting both...
Saved in:
Published in: | Water resources research 2016-04, Vol.52 (4), p.3068-3084 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a4293-3e7cd916f109ca18006023f2b86fd77718ef99bcbbaa35e69e921ef9fba3349c3 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a4293-3e7cd916f109ca18006023f2b86fd77718ef99bcbbaa35e69e921ef9fba3349c3 |
container_end_page | 3084 |
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 3068 |
container_title | Water resources research |
container_volume | 52 |
creator | Lamontagne, J. R. Stedinger, J. R. Yu, Xin Whealton, C. A. Xu, Ziyao |
description | Flood frequency analysis generally involves the use of simple parametric probability distributions to smooth and extrapolate the information provided by short flood records to estimate extreme flood flow quantiles. Parametric probability distributions can have difficulty simultaneously fitting both the largest and smallest floods. A danger is that the smallest observations in a record can distort the exceedance probabilities assigned to the large floods of interest. The identification and treatment of such Potentially Influential Low Floods (PILFs) frees a fitting algorithm to describe the distribution of the larger observations. This can allow parametric flood frequency analysis to be both efficient, and also robust to deviations from the proposed probability model's lower tail. Historically, PILF identification involved subjective judgement. We propose a new multiple Grubbs‐Beck outlier test (MGBT) for objective PILF identification. MGBT PILF identification rates (akin to Type I errors) are reported for the lognormal (LN) distribution and the log‐Pearson Type III (LP3) distribution with a variety of skew coefficients. MGBT PILF identification generally matched subjective identification from a recent California flood frequency study. Monte Carlo results show that censoring of PILFs identified by the MGBT algorithm improves the extreme quantile estimator efficiency of the expected moments algorithm (EMA) for negatively skewed LP3 distributions and has little effect for zero or positive skews; simultaneously it protects against deviations from the LP3 in the lower tail, as illustrated by distorted LN examples. Thus, MGBT generally makes flood frequency analysis based on the LP3 distribution with EMA both more accurate and more robust.
Key Points:
Treatment of Potentially Influential Low Floods can make flood frequency methods more robust
The MGBT outlier test can be an effective tool for identifying PILFs
Using the MGBT to identify PILFs improves robustness of the EMA method, while not losing efficiency |
doi_str_mv | 10.1002/2015WR018093 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1794500477</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1794500477</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a4293-3e7cd916f109ca18006023f2b86fd77718ef99bcbbaa35e69e921ef9fba3349c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp90c1KAzEQAOAgCtafmw8Q8OLB1fzsbna8adEqKEpRepIlm05wNW1qsov05iP4jD6JkXoQD54Ghm-G-SFkj7Mjzpg4FowXkzHjFQO5RgYc8jxToOQ6GTCWy4xLUJtkK8ZnxnhelGpAHse-6WNHrfN-Sm3A1x7nZkn1XLtlbOMJvcNgfZjpuUHqLT2_OaVvbfdEZ73r2oVDOgp908TP948zNC_U951rMdAOYxd3yIbVLuLuT9wmDxfn98PL7Pp2dDU8vc50LkBmEpWZAi8tZ2B0Gp-VTEgrmqq0U6UUr9ACNKZptJYFloAgeErZRkuZg5Hb5GDVdxF8WiB29ayNBp3Tc_R9rLmCvEgnUCrR_T_02fchbZsUMCVA5Lz4V6kKCgZVVSZ1uFIm-BgD2noR2pkOy5qz-vsj9e-PJC5X_K11uPzX1pPxcCw4pKov-puMsQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1789509886</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Robust flood frequency analysis: Performance of EMA with multiple Grubbs‐Beck outlier tests</title><source>Wiley-Blackwell AGU Digital Archive</source><creator>Lamontagne, J. R. ; Stedinger, J. R. ; Yu, Xin ; Whealton, C. A. ; Xu, Ziyao</creator><creatorcontrib>Lamontagne, J. R. ; Stedinger, J. R. ; Yu, Xin ; Whealton, C. A. ; Xu, Ziyao</creatorcontrib><description>Flood frequency analysis generally involves the use of simple parametric probability distributions to smooth and extrapolate the information provided by short flood records to estimate extreme flood flow quantiles. Parametric probability distributions can have difficulty simultaneously fitting both the largest and smallest floods. A danger is that the smallest observations in a record can distort the exceedance probabilities assigned to the large floods of interest. The identification and treatment of such Potentially Influential Low Floods (PILFs) frees a fitting algorithm to describe the distribution of the larger observations. This can allow parametric flood frequency analysis to be both efficient, and also robust to deviations from the proposed probability model's lower tail. Historically, PILF identification involved subjective judgement. We propose a new multiple Grubbs‐Beck outlier test (MGBT) for objective PILF identification. MGBT PILF identification rates (akin to Type I errors) are reported for the lognormal (LN) distribution and the log‐Pearson Type III (LP3) distribution with a variety of skew coefficients. MGBT PILF identification generally matched subjective identification from a recent California flood frequency study. Monte Carlo results show that censoring of PILFs identified by the MGBT algorithm improves the extreme quantile estimator efficiency of the expected moments algorithm (EMA) for negatively skewed LP3 distributions and has little effect for zero or positive skews; simultaneously it protects against deviations from the LP3 in the lower tail, as illustrated by distorted LN examples. Thus, MGBT generally makes flood frequency analysis based on the LP3 distribution with EMA both more accurate and more robust.
Key Points:
Treatment of Potentially Influential Low Floods can make flood frequency methods more robust
The MGBT outlier test can be an effective tool for identifying PILFs
Using the MGBT to identify PILFs improves robustness of the EMA method, while not losing efficiency</description><identifier>ISSN: 0043-1397</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1944-7973</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/2015WR018093</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Washington: John Wiley & Sons, Inc</publisher><subject>Algorithms ; Borides ; Bulletin 17 ; Coefficients ; Computer simulation ; Distribution ; Efficiency ; Extrapolation ; Flood flow ; Flood frequency ; Flood frequency analysis ; Floods ; Frequency analysis ; Freshwater ; Hazards ; Identification ; log‐Pearson Type III ; Mathematical models ; Monte Carlo simulation ; outliers ; PILFs ; Probability ; Probability theory ; quantile 59 efficiency ; Quantiles ; River discharge ; robust flood frequency analysis ; Robustness ; Skewed distributions ; Statistical methods</subject><ispartof>Water resources research, 2016-04, Vol.52 (4), p.3068-3084</ispartof><rights>2016. American Geophysical Union. All Rights Reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a4293-3e7cd916f109ca18006023f2b86fd77718ef99bcbbaa35e69e921ef9fba3349c3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-a4293-3e7cd916f109ca18006023f2b86fd77718ef99bcbbaa35e69e921ef9fba3349c3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2F2015WR018093$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2F2015WR018093$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,11495,27903,27904,46446,46870</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Lamontagne, J. R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stedinger, J. R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yu, Xin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Whealton, C. A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xu, Ziyao</creatorcontrib><title>Robust flood frequency analysis: Performance of EMA with multiple Grubbs‐Beck outlier tests</title><title>Water resources research</title><description>Flood frequency analysis generally involves the use of simple parametric probability distributions to smooth and extrapolate the information provided by short flood records to estimate extreme flood flow quantiles. Parametric probability distributions can have difficulty simultaneously fitting both the largest and smallest floods. A danger is that the smallest observations in a record can distort the exceedance probabilities assigned to the large floods of interest. The identification and treatment of such Potentially Influential Low Floods (PILFs) frees a fitting algorithm to describe the distribution of the larger observations. This can allow parametric flood frequency analysis to be both efficient, and also robust to deviations from the proposed probability model's lower tail. Historically, PILF identification involved subjective judgement. We propose a new multiple Grubbs‐Beck outlier test (MGBT) for objective PILF identification. MGBT PILF identification rates (akin to Type I errors) are reported for the lognormal (LN) distribution and the log‐Pearson Type III (LP3) distribution with a variety of skew coefficients. MGBT PILF identification generally matched subjective identification from a recent California flood frequency study. Monte Carlo results show that censoring of PILFs identified by the MGBT algorithm improves the extreme quantile estimator efficiency of the expected moments algorithm (EMA) for negatively skewed LP3 distributions and has little effect for zero or positive skews; simultaneously it protects against deviations from the LP3 in the lower tail, as illustrated by distorted LN examples. Thus, MGBT generally makes flood frequency analysis based on the LP3 distribution with EMA both more accurate and more robust.
Key Points:
Treatment of Potentially Influential Low Floods can make flood frequency methods more robust
The MGBT outlier test can be an effective tool for identifying PILFs
Using the MGBT to identify PILFs improves robustness of the EMA method, while not losing efficiency</description><subject>Algorithms</subject><subject>Borides</subject><subject>Bulletin 17</subject><subject>Coefficients</subject><subject>Computer simulation</subject><subject>Distribution</subject><subject>Efficiency</subject><subject>Extrapolation</subject><subject>Flood flow</subject><subject>Flood frequency</subject><subject>Flood frequency analysis</subject><subject>Floods</subject><subject>Frequency analysis</subject><subject>Freshwater</subject><subject>Hazards</subject><subject>Identification</subject><subject>log‐Pearson Type III</subject><subject>Mathematical models</subject><subject>Monte Carlo simulation</subject><subject>outliers</subject><subject>PILFs</subject><subject>Probability</subject><subject>Probability theory</subject><subject>quantile 59 efficiency</subject><subject>Quantiles</subject><subject>River discharge</subject><subject>robust flood frequency analysis</subject><subject>Robustness</subject><subject>Skewed distributions</subject><subject>Statistical methods</subject><issn>0043-1397</issn><issn>1944-7973</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp90c1KAzEQAOAgCtafmw8Q8OLB1fzsbna8adEqKEpRepIlm05wNW1qsov05iP4jD6JkXoQD54Ghm-G-SFkj7Mjzpg4FowXkzHjFQO5RgYc8jxToOQ6GTCWy4xLUJtkK8ZnxnhelGpAHse-6WNHrfN-Sm3A1x7nZkn1XLtlbOMJvcNgfZjpuUHqLT2_OaVvbfdEZ73r2oVDOgp908TP948zNC_U951rMdAOYxd3yIbVLuLuT9wmDxfn98PL7Pp2dDU8vc50LkBmEpWZAi8tZ2B0Gp-VTEgrmqq0U6UUr9ACNKZptJYFloAgeErZRkuZg5Hb5GDVdxF8WiB29ayNBp3Tc_R9rLmCvEgnUCrR_T_02fchbZsUMCVA5Lz4V6kKCgZVVSZ1uFIm-BgD2noR2pkOy5qz-vsj9e-PJC5X_K11uPzX1pPxcCw4pKov-puMsQ</recordid><startdate>201604</startdate><enddate>201604</enddate><creator>Lamontagne, J. R.</creator><creator>Stedinger, J. R.</creator><creator>Yu, Xin</creator><creator>Whealton, C. A.</creator><creator>Xu, Ziyao</creator><general>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QH</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>H96</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>P64</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201604</creationdate><title>Robust flood frequency analysis: Performance of EMA with multiple Grubbs‐Beck outlier tests</title><author>Lamontagne, J. R. ; Stedinger, J. R. ; Yu, Xin ; Whealton, C. A. ; Xu, Ziyao</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a4293-3e7cd916f109ca18006023f2b86fd77718ef99bcbbaa35e69e921ef9fba3349c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Algorithms</topic><topic>Borides</topic><topic>Bulletin 17</topic><topic>Coefficients</topic><topic>Computer simulation</topic><topic>Distribution</topic><topic>Efficiency</topic><topic>Extrapolation</topic><topic>Flood flow</topic><topic>Flood frequency</topic><topic>Flood frequency analysis</topic><topic>Floods</topic><topic>Frequency analysis</topic><topic>Freshwater</topic><topic>Hazards</topic><topic>Identification</topic><topic>log‐Pearson Type III</topic><topic>Mathematical models</topic><topic>Monte Carlo simulation</topic><topic>outliers</topic><topic>PILFs</topic><topic>Probability</topic><topic>Probability theory</topic><topic>quantile 59 efficiency</topic><topic>Quantiles</topic><topic>River discharge</topic><topic>robust flood frequency analysis</topic><topic>Robustness</topic><topic>Skewed distributions</topic><topic>Statistical methods</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lamontagne, J. R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stedinger, J. R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yu, Xin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Whealton, C. A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xu, Ziyao</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Aqualine</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy & Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Water resources research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lamontagne, J. R.</au><au>Stedinger, J. R.</au><au>Yu, Xin</au><au>Whealton, C. A.</au><au>Xu, Ziyao</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Robust flood frequency analysis: Performance of EMA with multiple Grubbs‐Beck outlier tests</atitle><jtitle>Water resources research</jtitle><date>2016-04</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>52</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>3068</spage><epage>3084</epage><pages>3068-3084</pages><issn>0043-1397</issn><eissn>1944-7973</eissn><abstract>Flood frequency analysis generally involves the use of simple parametric probability distributions to smooth and extrapolate the information provided by short flood records to estimate extreme flood flow quantiles. Parametric probability distributions can have difficulty simultaneously fitting both the largest and smallest floods. A danger is that the smallest observations in a record can distort the exceedance probabilities assigned to the large floods of interest. The identification and treatment of such Potentially Influential Low Floods (PILFs) frees a fitting algorithm to describe the distribution of the larger observations. This can allow parametric flood frequency analysis to be both efficient, and also robust to deviations from the proposed probability model's lower tail. Historically, PILF identification involved subjective judgement. We propose a new multiple Grubbs‐Beck outlier test (MGBT) for objective PILF identification. MGBT PILF identification rates (akin to Type I errors) are reported for the lognormal (LN) distribution and the log‐Pearson Type III (LP3) distribution with a variety of skew coefficients. MGBT PILF identification generally matched subjective identification from a recent California flood frequency study. Monte Carlo results show that censoring of PILFs identified by the MGBT algorithm improves the extreme quantile estimator efficiency of the expected moments algorithm (EMA) for negatively skewed LP3 distributions and has little effect for zero or positive skews; simultaneously it protects against deviations from the LP3 in the lower tail, as illustrated by distorted LN examples. Thus, MGBT generally makes flood frequency analysis based on the LP3 distribution with EMA both more accurate and more robust.
Key Points:
Treatment of Potentially Influential Low Floods can make flood frequency methods more robust
The MGBT outlier test can be an effective tool for identifying PILFs
Using the MGBT to identify PILFs improves robustness of the EMA method, while not losing efficiency</abstract><cop>Washington</cop><pub>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</pub><doi>10.1002/2015WR018093</doi><tpages>17</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0043-1397 |
ispartof | Water resources research, 2016-04, Vol.52 (4), p.3068-3084 |
issn | 0043-1397 1944-7973 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1794500477 |
source | Wiley-Blackwell AGU Digital Archive |
subjects | Algorithms Borides Bulletin 17 Coefficients Computer simulation Distribution Efficiency Extrapolation Flood flow Flood frequency Flood frequency analysis Floods Frequency analysis Freshwater Hazards Identification log‐Pearson Type III Mathematical models Monte Carlo simulation outliers PILFs Probability Probability theory quantile 59 efficiency Quantiles River discharge robust flood frequency analysis Robustness Skewed distributions Statistical methods |
title | Robust flood frequency analysis: Performance of EMA with multiple Grubbs‐Beck outlier tests |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-28T06%3A08%3A56IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Robust%20flood%20frequency%20analysis:%20Performance%20of%20EMA%20with%20multiple%20Grubbs%E2%80%90Beck%20outlier%20tests&rft.jtitle=Water%20resources%20research&rft.au=Lamontagne,%20J.%20R.&rft.date=2016-04&rft.volume=52&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=3068&rft.epage=3084&rft.pages=3068-3084&rft.issn=0043-1397&rft.eissn=1944-7973&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/2015WR018093&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1794500477%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a4293-3e7cd916f109ca18006023f2b86fd77718ef99bcbbaa35e69e921ef9fba3349c3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1789509886&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |