Probabilistic Flood Forecasting Using Hydrologic Uncertainty Processor with Ensemble Weather Forecasts

Shasha Han Department of Civil Engineering, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

Search for other papers by Shasha Han in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
and
Paulin Coulibaly Department of Civil Engineering, and School of Geography and Earth Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

Search for other papers by Paulin Coulibaly in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
Restricted access

Abstract

Recent advances in the field of flood forecasting have shown increased interests in probabilistic forecasting as it provides not only the point forecast but also the assessment of associated uncertainty. Here, an investigation of a hydrologic uncertainty processor (HUP) as a postprocessor of ensemble forecasts to generate probabilistic flood forecasts is presented. The main purpose is to quantify dominant uncertainties and enhance flood forecast reliability. HUP is based on Bayes’s theorem and designed to capture hydrologic uncertainty. Ensemble forecasts are forced by ensemble weather forecasts from the Global Ensemble Prediction System (GEPS) that are inherently uncertain, and the input uncertainty propagates through the model chain and integrates with hydrologic uncertainty in HUP. The bias of GEPS was removed using multivariate bias correction, and several scenarios were developed by different combinations of GEPS with HUP. The performance of different forecast horizons for these scenarios was compared using multifaceted evaluation metrics. Results show that HUP is able to improve the performance for both short- and medium-range forecasts; the improvement is significant for short lead times and becomes less obvious with increasing lead time. Overall, the performances for short-range forecasts when using HUP are promising, and the most satisfactory result for the short range is obtained by applying bias correction to each ensemble member plus applying the HUP postprocessor.

© 2019 American Meteorological Society. For information regarding reuse of this content and general copyright information, consult the AMS Copyright Policy (www.ametsoc.org/PUBSReuseLicenses).

Corresponding author: Shasha Han, hans6@mcmaster.ca

Abstract

Recent advances in the field of flood forecasting have shown increased interests in probabilistic forecasting as it provides not only the point forecast but also the assessment of associated uncertainty. Here, an investigation of a hydrologic uncertainty processor (HUP) as a postprocessor of ensemble forecasts to generate probabilistic flood forecasts is presented. The main purpose is to quantify dominant uncertainties and enhance flood forecast reliability. HUP is based on Bayes’s theorem and designed to capture hydrologic uncertainty. Ensemble forecasts are forced by ensemble weather forecasts from the Global Ensemble Prediction System (GEPS) that are inherently uncertain, and the input uncertainty propagates through the model chain and integrates with hydrologic uncertainty in HUP. The bias of GEPS was removed using multivariate bias correction, and several scenarios were developed by different combinations of GEPS with HUP. The performance of different forecast horizons for these scenarios was compared using multifaceted evaluation metrics. Results show that HUP is able to improve the performance for both short- and medium-range forecasts; the improvement is significant for short lead times and becomes less obvious with increasing lead time. Overall, the performances for short-range forecasts when using HUP are promising, and the most satisfactory result for the short range is obtained by applying bias correction to each ensemble member plus applying the HUP postprocessor.

© 2019 American Meteorological Society. For information regarding reuse of this content and general copyright information, consult the AMS Copyright Policy (www.ametsoc.org/PUBSReuseLicenses).

Corresponding author: Shasha Han, hans6@mcmaster.ca
Save
  • Anderson, E., 2006: Snow accumulation and ablation model—SNOW-17. User’s manual, NWS, 61 pp., http://www.nws.noaa.gov/oh/hrl/nwsrfs/users_manual/part2/_pdf/22snow17.pdf.

  • Ashkar, F., and F. Aucoin, 2012: Choice between competitive pairs of frequency models for use in hydrology: A review and some new results. Hydrol. Sci. J., 57, 10921106, https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2012.701746.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Bergström, S., 1976: Development and application of a conceptual runoff model for Scandinavian catchments. University of Lund Department of Water Resources Engineering Bulletin Series A, Vol. 52, SMHI Rep. 7, 134 pp.

  • Cannon, A. J., 2016: Multivariate bias correction of climate model output: Matching marginal distributions and intervariable dependence structure. J. Climate, 29, 70457064, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-15-0679.1.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Cannon, A. J., 2018: Multivariate quantile mapping bias correction: An N-dimensional probability density function transform for climate model simulations of multiple variables. Climate Dyn., 50, 3149, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-017-3580-6.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Cannon, A. J., S. R. Sobie, and T. Q. Murdock, 2015: Bias correction of GCM precipitation by quantile mapping: How well do methods preserve changes in quantiles and extremes? J. Climate, 28, 69386959, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00754.1.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Coulibaly, P., F. Anctil, and B. Bobée, 2001: Multivariate reservoir inflow forecasting using temporal neural networks. J. Hydrol. Eng., 6, 367376, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0699(2001)6:5(367).

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Cui, B., Z. Toth, Y. Zhu, and D. Hou, 2012: Bias correction for global ensemble forecast. Wea. Forecasting, 27, 396410, https://doi.org/10.1175/WAF-D-11-00011.1.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Eden, J. M., M. Widmann, D. Grawe, and S. Rast, 2012: Skill, correction, and downscaling of GCM-simulated precipitation. J. Climate, 25, 39703984, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-11-00254.1.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gneiting, T., A. E. Raftery, A. H. Westveld III, and T. Goldman, 2005: Calibrated probabilistic forecasting using ensemble model output statistics and minimum CRPS estimation. Mon. Wea. Rev., 133, 10981118, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR2904.1.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Han, S., and P. Coulibaly, 2017: Bayesian flood forecasting methods: A review. J. Hydrol., 551, 340351, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.06.004.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Han, S., P. Coulibaly, and D. Biondi, 2019: Assessing hydrologic uncertainty processor performance for flood forecasting in a semiurban watershed. J. Hydrol. Eng., https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0001828, in press.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • He, M., T. S. Hogue, K. J. Franz, S. A. Margulis, and J. A. Vrugt, 2011a: Characterizing parameter sensitivity and uncertainty for a snow model across hydroclimatic regimes. Adv. Water Resour., 34, 114127, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2010.10.002.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • He, M., T. S. Hogue, K. J. Franz, S. A. Margulis, and J. A. Vrugt, 2011b: Corruption of parameter behavior and regionalization by model and forcing data errors: A Bayesian example using the SNOW17 model. Water Resour. Res., 47, W07546, https://doi.org/10.1029/2010WR009753.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Houle, E. S., B. Livneh, and J. R. Kasprzyk, 2017: Exploring snow model parameter sensitivity using Sobol’ variance decomposition. Environ. Modell. Software, 89, 144158, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2016.11.024.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • IPCC, 2014: Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, 1465 pp., https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415416

    • Crossref
    • Export Citation
  • Jha, S. K., D. L. Shrestha, T. A. Stadnyk, and P. Coulibaly, 2018: Evaluation of ensemble precipitation forecasts generated through post-processing in a Canadian catchment. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 19571969, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-1957-2018.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Kelly, K. S., and R. Krzysztofowicz, 2000: Precipitation uncertainty processor for probabilistic river stage forecasting. Water Resour. Res., 36, 26432653, https://doi.org/10.1029/2000WR900061.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Koenker, R., 2005: Quantile Regression. Econometric Society Monographs, No. 38, Cambridge University Press, 349 pp., https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511754098.

    • Crossref
    • Export Citation
  • Krzysztofowicz, R., 1999: Bayesian theory of probabilistic forecasting via deterministic hydrologic model. Water Resour. Res., 35, 27392750, https://doi.org/10.1029/1999WR900099.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Krzysztofowicz, R., 2001: Integrator of uncertainties for probabilistic river stage forecasting: precipitation-dependent model. J. Hydrol., 249, 6985, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(01)00413-9.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Krzysztofowicz, R., 2002: Bayesian system for probabilistic river stage forecasting. J. Hydrol., 268, 1640, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(02)00106-3.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Krzysztofowicz, R., and K. S. Kelly, 2000: Hydrologic uncertainty processor for probabilistic river stage forecasting. Water Resour. Res., 36, 32653277, https://doi.org/10.1029/2000WR900108.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Krzysztofowicz, R., and H. D. Herr, 2001: Hydrologic uncertainty processor for probabilistic river stage forecasting: Precipitation-dependent model. J. Hydrol., 249, 4668, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(01)00412-7.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Krzysztofowicz, R., and C. J. Maranzano, 2004: Bayesian system for probabilistic stage transition forecasting. J. Hydrol., 299, 1544, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2004.02.013.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Laio, F., and S. Tamea, 2007: Verification tools for probabilistic forecast of continuous hydrological variables. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 11, 12671277, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-11-1267-2007.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Li, H., J. Sheffield, and E. F. Wood, 2010: Bias correction of monthly precipitation and temperature fields from Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change AR4 models using equidistant quantile matching. J. Geophys. Res., 115, D10101, https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JD012882.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Maraun, D., 2016: Bias correcting climate change simulations - A critical review. Curr. Climate Change Rep., 2, 211220, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40641-016-0050-x.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Maurer, E. P., and H. G. Hidalgo, 2008: Utility of daily vs. monthly large-scale climate data: An intercomparison of two statistical downscaling methods. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 12, 551563, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-12-551-2008.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Merz, R., and G. Blöschl, 2004: Regionalisation of catchment model parameters. J. Hydrol., 287, 95123, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2003.09.028.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Oudin, L., C. Michel, and F. Anctil, 2005a: Which potential evapotranspiration input for a lumped rainfall-runoff model?: Part 1—Can rainfall-runoff models effectively handle detailed potential evapotranspiration inputs? J. Hydrol., 303, 275289, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2004.08.025.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Oudin, L., F. Hervieu, C. Michel, C. Perrin, V. Andréassian, F. Anctil, and C. Loumagne, 2005b: Which potential evapotranspiration input for a lumped rainfall–runoff model?: Part 2—Towards a simple and efficient potential evapotranspiration model for rainfall-runoff modelling. J. Hydrol., 303, 290306, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2004.08.026.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Raftery, A. E., T. Gneiting, F. Balabdaoui, and M. Polakowski, 2005: Using Bayesian model averaging to calibrate forecast ensembles. Mon. Wea. Rev., 133, 11551174, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR2906.1.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Razavi, T., and P. Coulibaly, 2016: Improving streamflow estimation in ungauged basins using a multi-modelling approach. Hydrol. Sci. J., 61, 26682679, https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2016.1154558.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Razavi, T., and P. Coulibaly, 2017: An evaluation of regionalization and watershed classification schemes for continuous daily streamflow prediction in ungauged watersheds. Can. Water Resour. J., 42, 220, https://doi.org/10.1080/07011784.2016.1184590.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Reggiani, P., and A. H. Weerts, 2008a: Probabilistic quantitative precipitation forecast for flood prediction: An application. J. Hydrometeor., 9, 7695, https://doi.org/10.1175/2007JHM858.1.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Reggiani, P., and A. H. Weerts, 2008b: A Bayesian approach to decision-making under uncertainty: An application to real-time forecasting in the river Rhine. J. Hydrol., 356, 5669, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2008.03.027.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Reggiani, P., M. Renner, A. H. Weerts, and P. A. H. J. M. van Gelder, 2009: Uncertainty assessment via Bayesian revision of ensemble streamflow predictions in the operational river Rhine forecasting system. Water Resour. Res., 45, W02428, https://doi.org/10.1029/2007WR006758.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Regonda, S. K., D.-J. Seo, B. Lawrence, J. D. Brown, and J. Demargne, 2013: Short-term ensemble streamflow forecasting using operationally-produced single-valued streamflow forecasts – A Hydrologic Model Output Statistics (HMOS) approach. J. Hydrol., 497, 8096, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2013.05.028.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Rizzo, M. L., and G. J. Székely, 2016: Energy distance. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Comput. Stat., 8, 2738, https://doi.org/10.1002/wics.1375.

  • Samuel, J., P. Coulibaly, and R. A. Metcalfe, 2011: Estimation of continuous streamflow in Ontario ungauged basins: Comparison of regionalization methods. J. Hydrol. Eng., 16, 447459, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0000338.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Schefzik, R., 2016: Combining parametric low-dimensional ensemble postprocessing with reordering methods. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 142, 24632477, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.2839.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Seibert, J., 1999: Regionalisation of parameters for a conceptual rainfall-runoff model. Agric. For. Meteor., 98–99, 279293, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1923(99)00105-7.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Székely, G. J., and M. L. Rizzo, 2013: Energy statistics: A class of statistics based on distances. J. Stat. Plan. Inference, 143, 12491272, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jspi.2013.03.018.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Todini, E., 2008: A model conditional processor to assess predictive uncertainty in flood forecasting. Intl. J. River Basin Manage., 6, 123137, https://doi.org/10.1080/15715124.2008.9635342.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • United Nations, 2004: Guidelines for reducing flood losses. U.N. International Strategy for Disaster Reduction, 79 pp., https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/flood_guidelines.pdf.

  • Verkade, J. S., J. D. Brown, F. Davids, P. Reggiani, and A. H. Weerts, 2017: Estimating predictive hydrological uncertainty by dressing deterministic and ensemble forecasts; a comparison, with application to Meuse and Rhine. J. Hydrol., 555, 257277, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.10.024.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Vrugt, J. A., C. G. H. Diks, H. V. Gupta, W. Bouten, and J. M. Verstraten, 2005: Improved treatment of uncertainty in hydrologic modeling: Combining the strengths of global optimization and data assimilation. Water Resour. Res., 41, W01017, https://doi.org/10.1029/2004WR003059.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Wang, L., and W. Chen, 2014: A CMIP5 multimodel projection of future temperature, precipitation, and climatological drought in China. Int. J. Climatol., 34, 20592078, https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.3822.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 1693 677 96
PDF Downloads 1199 163 13