Model Assessment

Non-Parametric Models

A Plotting Position is a distribution free estimator used to derive empirical exceedance probabilities. By using the plotting position, we can evaluate the quality of our parametric model. To compute the plotting position, arrange the sample observations in descending order of magnitude: \(x_{n:n} \geq \dots \geq x_{1:n}\). Then, the empirical exceedance probabilities are given by the following formula:

The coefficient \(a\) depends on the plotting position formula:

Formula	\(a\)	Simplified Equation
Weibull	\(0\)	\(p_{i:n} = \frac{i}{n +1}\)
Blom	\(0.375\)	\(p_{i:n} = \frac{i-0.375}{n + 0.25}\)
Cunnane	\(0.4\)	\(p_{i:n} = \frac{i-0.4}{n+0.2}\)
Gringorten	\(0.44\)	\(p_{i:n} = \frac{i-0.44}{n + 0.12}\)
Hazen	\(0.5\)	\(p_{i:n} = \frac{i-0.5}{n}\)

By default, the FFA framework uses the Weibull formula, which is unbiased.

Accuracy Statistics

\(R^2\) - Coefficient of Determination

To compute the \(R^2\) statistic, we perform a linear regression of the streamflow data against the predictions of the parametric model. The \(R^2\) statistic describes how well the parametric model captures variance in the streamflow data. Higher is better.

RMSE - Root-Mean Squared Error

The RMSE statistic describes the average absolute difference between the data and the predictions of the parametric model. Lower is better.

Bias

The Bias statistic describes the average difference between the data and the predictions of the parametric model. A positive bias indicates that the model tends to overestimate the data while a negative bias indicates that the model tends to underestimate the data.

Information Criterion

The Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) and Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) describe the quality of a model based on the error (RMSE) and the number of parameters (n_theta). Better models have a lower AIC/BIC, which indicates that they have less parameters and lower error.

AIC <- (n * log(RMSE)) + (2 * n_theta)
BIC <- (n * log(RMSE)) + (log(n) * n_theta)

Uncertainty Statistics

The FFA framework uses three statistics to assess the uncertainty in flood quantile estimates:

• AW captures precision (narrower confidence intervals are better).
• POC captures reliability (higher coverage of observations is better).
• CWI is a composite measure balancing both precision and reliability (lower is better).

We use these metrics together to evaluate the robustness of the flood frequency analysis.

AW – Average Width

AW is the average width of the interpolated confidence intervals across return periods of interest. A smaller AW indicates more precise quantile estimates. To compute AW, we use log-linear interpolation to estimate the confidence intervals of the empirical exceedance probabilities from the confidence intervals computed during uncertainty quantification.

POC – Percent of Coverage

POC is the percentage of observed quantiles that fall within their corresponding confidence intervals. A higher POC indicates greater reliability of the confidence intervals.

CWI – Confidence Width Indicator

CWI is a composite metric that penalizes wide and/or poorly calibrated confidence intervals.

• A lower CWI is better.
• Wide intervals and low coverage increase the penalty.
• Ideal confidence intervals are both narrow and well-calibrated, resulting in a low CWI.

The CWI is computed using the following formula, where alpha is the significance level.

CWI <- AW * exp((1 - alpha) - POC / 100)^2;