Assessing the reliability of probabilistic flood inundation model predictions. Issue 19 (3rd May 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Stephens, Elisabeth; Bates, Paul
• Is Part Of: Hydrological processes. Volume 29:Issue 19(2015:Sep.)
• Page Start: 4264
• Page End: 4283
• Publication Date: 2015-05-03
• Subjects: Hydrology -- Periodicals; Hydrology -- Research -- Periodicals; Hydrologic models -- Periodicals; Hydrological forecasting -- Periodicals; 631.432
• DOI: 10.1002/hyp.10451
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0885-6087

Abstract

<abstract abstract-type="main"> <title>Abstract</title> <p>An ability to quantify the reliability of probabilistic flood inundation predictions is a requirement not only for guiding model development but also for their successful application. Probabilistic flood inundation predictions are usually produced by choosing a method of weighting the model parameter space, but previous study suggests that this choice leads to clear differences in inundation probabilities. This study aims to address the evaluation of the reliability of these probabilistic predictions. However, a lack of an adequate number of observations of flood inundation for a catchment limits the application of conventional methods of evaluating predictive reliability. Consequently, attempts have been made to assess the reliability of probabilistic predictions using multiple observations from a single flood event.</p> <p>Here, a LISFLOOD‐FP hydraulic model of an extreme (>1 in 1000 years) flood event in Cockermouth, UK, is constructed and calibrated using multiple performance measures from both peak flood wrack mark data and aerial photography captured post‐peak. These measures are used in weighting the parameter space to produce multiple probabilistic predictions for the event. Two methods of assessing the reliability of these probabilistic predictions using limited observations are utilized; an existing method assessing the binary pattern of flooding, and a method developed in this paper to assess predictions of water surface elevation. This study finds that the water surface elevation method has both a better diagnostic and discriminatory ability, but this result is likely to be sensitive to the unknown uncertainties in the upstream boundary condition. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.</p> </abstract>