Bias compensation in flood frequency analysis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Flood frequency analysis (FFA) is essential for water resources management. Long flow records improve the precision of estimated quantiles; however, in some cases, sample size in one location is not sufficient to achieve a reliable estimate of the statistical parameters and thus, regional FFA is commonly used to decrease the uncertainty in the prediction. In this paper, the bias of several commonly used parameter estimators, including L-moment, probability weighted moment and maximum likelihood estimation, applied to the general extreme value (GEV) distribution is evaluated using a Monte Carlo simulation. Two bias compensation approaches: compensation based on the shape parameter, and compensation using three GEV parameters, are proposed based on the analysis and the models are then applied to streamflow records in southern Alberta. Compensation efficiency varies among estimators and between compensation approaches. The results overall suggest that compensation of the bias due to the estimator and short sample size would significantly improve the accuracy of the quantile estimation. In addition, at-site FFA is able to provide reliable estimation based on short data, when accounting for the bias in the estimator appropriately.Editor D. Koutsoyiannis; Associate editor Sheng Yue
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it