Novel methods for estimating extreme design rainfalls at gauged and ungauged locations in a changing climate
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Information on the variability of extreme rainfalls in time and in space is of critical importance for many types of extreme hydrologic studies related to the estimation of runoff characteristics for planning, design, and management of various water resources systems.In particular, for urban watersheds that are generally characterized by a fast response, the design of different urban infrastructures (such as small dams, culverts, storm sewers, detention basins, and so on) require hence an accurate and robust estimation of extreme design rainfalls for very high temporal resolutions (ranging from a few minutes to one day) in order to provide an accurate and reliable description of runoff properties for urban inundation management.In addition, in recent years, climate change has been recognized as having a profound impact on the hydrologic cycle at different temporal and spatial scales.Consequently, the intensity and frequency of extreme storm events in most regions will be likely increased in the future.The present study is therefore was carried out to develop appropriate methods for improving the accuracy of design rainfall estimation at gauged and ungauged locations in the current climate as well as in the context of climate variability and climate change.This study can be divided into five primary parts.The first part presents a general procedure for assessing systematically the performance of different commonly used probability distributions in extreme rainfall frequency analyses based on their descriptive as well as predictive abilities.This assessment procedure relies on an extensive set of graphical and numerical performance criteria to identify the most suitable models that could provide the most accurate and most robust extreme rainfall estimates.The proposed systematic iv assessment approach has been shown to be more efficient and more robust than the traditional model selection method based on only limited goodness-of-fit criteria.To test the feasibility of the proposed procedure, an illustrative application was carried out using 5-minute, 1-hour, and 24hour annual maximum rainfall data from a network of 21 raingages located in the Ontario region in Canada.Results have indicated that the Generalized Extreme Values (GEV), Generalized Normal (GNO), and Pearson Type 3 (PE3) models were the best models for describing the distribution of daily and sub-daily annual maximum rainfalls in this region.The GEV distribution, however, was preferred to the GNO and PE3 because it was based on a more solid theoretical basis for representing the distribution of extreme random variables.The second part introduces a new probability-weighted-moment-based scaling Generalized Extreme Value (GEV/PWM) distribution model for modeling rainfall extremes across a wide range of time scales (e.g., from several minutes to one day).The GEV distribution has been recommended in the national guidelines of many countries.The mathematical framework and the scaling properties of the proposed GEV/PWM model were derived.The relations between the GEV/PWM model and three existing scaling models such as the non-central-moment-based GEV (GEV/NCM) and the NCM-and PWM-based Gumbel models (GUM/NCM and GUM/PWM) were described.A comparative study was then carried out to asses the performance of these models using the available extreme rainfall data from a network of 74 raingages located across Canada.The scaling behaviours of extreme rainfall processes were also analyzed using both NCM and PWM estimation methods.Results of this comparative study have indicated the superior performance of the proposed GEV/PWM model as compared to the existing GEV/NCM, GUM/NCM, and GUM/PWM based on an extensive set of graphical and numerical comparison Comparing & Assessing results Considering other criteria Climate Scenarios Regression models • Real space: 2 or 3 parameters • Log space: 1st to 6th order polynm Rainfall Frequency Atlas/Maps Scale-invariance models Design Storm Ch.2 Ch.4 Ch.6 -1.24 -0.96 -0.96 -0.82 -0.35 -0.21 -0.80 -0.89 -1.36 38 -0.09 -0.22 -0.55 -1.15 -1.58 -1.58 -2.11 -2.45 -1.99 2 -0.21 -0.47 -0.82 -0.67 -0.11 -0.09 -0.06 -0.74 -1.27 39 -0.43 -0.80 -0.84 -1.49-1.05 -0.48 -0.44 -0.71 -1.12 3 -0.60 -0.66 -0.13 -0.63 -1.54 -1.38 -0.84 -0.16 -0.09 40 -0.14 -0.43 -0.47 -1.07 -1.13 -0.32 -1.13 -0.87 -0.03 4 -1.29 -1.39 -1.29 -0.57-0.65 -1.39 -1.85 -0.79 -1.29 41 -0.77 -0.57-0.59 -1.02 -0.54 -0.24 -0.29 -0.44 -0.44 5 -0.24 -0.27 -0.22 -0.11 -0.57-1.14 -1.19 -1.03 -0.08 42 -1.34-1.22 -1.53 -0.39 -0.29 -0.16 -0.23 -0.02 -0.72 6 -0.59 -0.32 -0.30 -0.05 -0.82 -2.11 -2.41 -2.88 -0.77 43 -1.17 -1.36 -1.43 -1.64 -1.30 -0.57-0.18 -0.29 -0.63 7 -0.19 -0.02 -0.49-0.36 -0.45 -0.62 -0.83 -0.96 -1.40 44 -0.60 -0.25 -0.08 -0.16 -0.07 -0.08 -1.31 -1.02 -0.56 8 -0.63 -0.34 -0.10 -0.18 -0.13 -0.42 -1.36 -0.52 -0.63 45 -1.41 -1.20 -1.27 -0.98 -1.48 -0.80 -0.58 -0.99 -2.26 9 -1.39 -1.22 -0.91 -0.58 -1.44 -1.31 -1.08 -0.58 -0.35 46 -0.80 -0.62 -0.42 -0.34 -0.94 -1.28 -0.80 -0.60 -0.72 10 -0.89 -0.62 -0.81 -1.00 -0.65 -0.43 -1.16 -1.54 -1.46 47 -1.38 -1.27 -1.00 -0.92 -1.08 -0.08 -0.03 -0.24 -0.81 11 -1.58 -1.13 -0.95 -1.47 -1.29 -1.95 -0.01 -0.65 -1.78 48 -0.36 -1.27 -1.83 -1.70 -1.85 -1.50 -0.26 -0.01 -0.30 12 -2.98 -1.53 -0.92 -1.03 -1.69 -1.90 -1.27 -2.11 -2.79 49 -0.05 -0.88 -1.00 -0.46 -0.41 -0.47 -0.44 -0.73 -0.48 13 -2.10 -1.67 -1.85 -1.70 -1.22 -0.49-1.12 -1.45 -2.25 50 -2.29 -2.76 -1.67 -1.74 -2.06 -1.69 -1.83 -1.89 -0.33 14 -1.88 -2.02 -2.11 -2.58 -2.32 -1.95 -1.31 -1.74 -2.04 51 -0.62 -1.36 -1.36 -1.81 -2.05 -1.24 -0.21 -0.87 -1.60 15 -0.73 -0.17 -0.13 -0.21 -0.55 -0.60 -0.06 0.00 -0.40 52 -0.25 -0.98 -0.89 -0.87 -0.42 -0.39 -0.22 -0.33 -0.01 16 -0.26-0.38 -0.58 -1.00 -1.27 -0.88 -0.25 -0.83 -1.14 53 -0.40 -0.49-0.40 -0.40 -0.66 -1.04 -0.15 -0.02 -0.08 17 -1.53-1.24 -0.95 -0.70 -0.70 -0.66 -0.54 -0.31 -0.19 54 -0.89 -0.35 -0.64 -0.46 -0.85 -1.63 -2.16 -2.35 -2.5718 -1.49-1.23 -0.59 -0.17 -0.36 -1.15 -0.47 -1.11 -0.89 55 -0.71 -0.44 -0.77 -1.03 -0.55 -0.77 -1.34 -1.02 -0.59 19 -0.02 -0.19 -0.15 -0.32 -0.11 -0.19 -0.06 -0.28 -0.36 56 -1.99 -1.66 -1.13 -0.34 -1.44 -1.46 -0.91 -1.50 -1.68 20 -1.30 -0.70 -0.10 -0.37 -0.60 -0.47 -0.63 -0.65 -0.44 57 -0.30 -1.26 -1.66 -1.53 -0.03 -0.08 -0.63 -0.32 -0.43 21 -0.35 -0.16 -0.12 -0.23 -0.06 -0.06 -0.74 -0.87 -0.99 58 -0.36 -1.61 -2.52 -2.88 -2.13 -1.14 -0.86 -0.14 -1.36 22 -0.60 -0.31 -0.13 -0.16 -0.21 -0.68 -0.39 -1.17 -1.12 59 -1.70 -1.75 -1.49-2.43 -2.48 -2.06 -2.45 -1.72 -1.56 23 -0.59 -0.11 -0.18 -0.33 -0.15 -0.13 -0.38 -0.68 -1.19 60 -2.19 -0.89 -0.75 -0.27 -0.61 -0.38 -1.17 -0.17 -0.84 24 -1.30-1.14 -1.62 -1.38 -1.20 -1.42 -0.48 -0.92 -1.44 61 -1.34 -0.75 -0.27 -0.59 -1.09 -0.48 -0.52 -0.77 -1.50 25 -0.04 -0.60 -0.26 -0.66 -0.64 -0.51 -0.66 -0.95 -0.5762 -0.41 -0.18 -0.82 -1.02 -0.79 -0.25 -1.34 -1.50 -0.68 26 -0.68 -1.10 -1.48 -1.46 -1.12 -1.26 -1.84 -1.20 -1.14 63 -1.55 -1.96 -1.75 -1.26 -0.85 -0.75 -0.17 -0.19 -0.06 27 -1.22 -1.08 -1.30 -1.19 -1.30 -0.87 -0.89 -0.84 -0.78 64 -2.43 -1.43 -1.13 -0.70 -0.32 -0.28 -0.60 -0.47 -0.02 28 -0.18 -0.16 0.00 -0.08 -0.10 -0.39 -0.42 -0.26 -0.10 65 -0.44 -0.58 -0.43 -0.97 -1.38 -0.77 -1.08 -1.40 -1.94 29 -1.41 -1.62 -1.43 -
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,012 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».