Introducing non-stationarity into the development of intensity-duration-frequency curves under a changing climate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intensity-duration-frequency (IDF) relationships are traditional tools in water infrastructure planning and design. IDFs are developed under a stationarity assumption which may not be realistic, neither in the present nor in the future, under a changing climatic condition. This paper introduces a framework for generating non-stationary IDFs under climate change, assuming that probability of occurrence of quantiles changes over time. Using Extreme Value Theory, eight trend combinations in Generalized Extreme Value (GEV) parameters using time as covariate are compared with a stationary GEV, to identify the best alternative. Additionally, a modified Equidistance Quantile Matching (EQMNS) method is implemented to develop IDFs for future conditions, introducing non-stationarity where justified, based on the Global Climate Models (GCM). The methodology is applied for Moncton and Shearwater gauges in Northeast Canada. From the results, it is observed that EQMNS is able to capture the trends in the present and to translate them to estimated future rainfall intensities. Comparison of present and future IDFs strongly suggest that return period can be reduced by more than 50 years in the estimates of future rainfall intensities (e.g., historical 100-yr return period extreme rainfall may have frequency smaller than 50-yr under future conditions), raising attention to emerging risks to water infrastructure systems.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".