Topological and canonical kriging for design flood prediction in ungauged catchments: An improvement over a traditional regional regression approach?

49Citations
Citations of this article
76Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

In the United States, estimation of flood frequency quantiles at ungauged locations has been largely based on regional regression techniques that relate measurable catchment descriptors to flood quantiles. More recently, spatial interpolation techniques of point data have been shown to be effective for predicting streamflow statistics (i.e., flood flows and low-flow indices) in ungauged catchments. Literature reports successful applications of two techniques, canonical kriging, CK (or physiographical-space-based interpolation, PSBI), and topological kriging, TK (or top-kriging). CK performs the spatial interpolation of the streamflow statistic of interest in the two-dimensional space of catchment descriptors. TK predicts the streamflow statistic along river networks taking both the catchment area and nested nature of catchments into account. It is of interest to understand how these spatial interpolation methods compare with generalized least squares (GLS) regression, one of the most common approaches to estimate flood quantiles at ungauged locations. By means of a leave-one-out cross-validation procedure, the performance of CK and TK was compared to GLS regression equations developed for the prediction of 10, 50, 100 and 500 yr floods for 61 streamgauges in the southeast United States. TK substantially outperforms GLS and CK for the study area, particularly for large catchments. The performance of TK over GLS highlights an important distinction between the treatments of spatial correlation when using regression-based or spatial interpolation methods to estimate flood quantiles at ungauged locations. The analysis also shows that coupling TK with CK slightly improves the performance of TK; however, the improvement is marginal when compared to the improvement in performance over GLS. © 2013 Author(s).

Figures

  • Fig. 2. Normalized values of catchment descriptors (see also Table 1 for label description) used in the study; box plots report minimum and maximum values (whiskers), 25th, 50th and 75th percentiles (box), and outliers (circles).
  • Fig. 1. Map (A) shows the locations of and contributing catchment areas to the 61 study streamgauges located in the southeast United States. The range of record lengths (B) across the study streamgauges is also shown.
  • Table 1. Catchment characteristics describing the morphology, climate, land cover and soil properties of the contributing areas to the 61 study streamgauges (Gotvald et al., 2009). Where applicable, catchment characteristics were computed as an average over the drainage area.
  • Table 2. Range of empirical flood quantiles across the 61 study streamgauges (Gotvald et al., 2009).
  • Fig. 3. Error (or residual) between the empirical and predicted flood quantile by study streamgauge and estimation method. Inset in each panel are bars showing the efficiency and log efficiency of the empirical and predicted flood quantiles for the generalized least squares regression, topological kriging, and canonical kriging methods. The log efficiency is the efficiency computed from the natural logarithms of the empirical and predicted flood quantiles.
  • Fig. 4. Comparison of the absolute error between empirical and predicted flood quantiles resulting from topological and canonical kriging to the absolute error resulting from generalized least squares regression.
  • Fig. 5. Differences in absolute error resulting from the application of (A) canonical kriging and the coupling of canonical kriging with topological kriging of the residuals (CK-TK), and (B) topological kriging and the coupling of topological with canonical kriging of the residuals (TK-CK) by catchment area for the 100 yr flood quantile.
  • Fig. 6. Comparison of the absolute errors between empirical and predicted flood quantiles resulting from the coupling of topological with canonical kriging of the residuals (TK-CK) and canonical kriging with topological kriging of the residuals (CK-TK) to the absolute error resulting from generalized least squares regression.

References Powered by Scopus

River flow forecasting through conceptual models part I - A discussion of principles

19029Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Geostatistical tools for modeling and interpreting ecological spatial dependence

1047Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

IAHS Decade on Predictions in Ungauged Basins (PUB), 2003-2012: Shaping an exciting future for the hydrological sciences

1031Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Regionalization of hydrological modeling for predicting streamflow in ungauged catchments: A comprehensive review

163Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

The Data Synergy Effects of Time-Series Deep Learning Models in Hydrology

65Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Ordinary kriging as a tool to estimate historical daily streamflow records

46Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Archfield, S. A., Pugliese, A., Castellarin, A., Skøien, J. O., & Kiang, J. E. (2013). Topological and canonical kriging for design flood prediction in ungauged catchments: An improvement over a traditional regional regression approach? Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 17(4), 1575–1588. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-17-1575-2013

Readers over time

‘13‘14‘15‘16‘17‘18‘19‘20‘21‘22‘23‘240481216

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 43

70%

Researcher 14

23%

Professor / Associate Prof. 2

3%

Lecturer / Post doc 2

3%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Engineering 25

40%

Earth and Planetary Sciences 19

31%

Environmental Science 16

26%

Arts and Humanities 2

3%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0