Uncertainty Analysis and Quantification in Flood Insurance Rate Maps Using Bayesian Model Averaging and Hierarchical BMA

被引:8
|
作者
Huang, Tao [1 ]
Merwade, Venkatesh [2 ]
机构
[1] Purdue Univ, Lyles Sch Civil Engn, 550 Stadium Mall Dr, W Lafayette, IN 47907 USA
[2] Purdue Univ, Sch Civil Engn, 550Stadium Mall Dr, W Lafayette, IN 47907 USA
关键词
Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM); Uncertainty; Bayesian model averaging (BMA); Hierarchical Bayesian model averaging (HBMA); Hydrologic Engineering Center River Analysis System (HEC-RAS); Probabilistic flood map; MULTIMODEL ENSEMBLE; SENSITIVITY-ANALYSIS; TIME-SERIES; INUNDATION; COMBINATION; RAINFALL; FORECASTS; CALIBRATION; PREDICTION; HYDROLOGY;
D O I
10.1061/JHYEFF.HEENG-5851
中图分类号
TU [建筑科学];
学科分类号
0813 ;
摘要
Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) managed by FEMA have been providing ongoing flood information to most communities in the United States over the past half-century. However, the uncertainty associated with the modeling of FIRMs, some of which are created by using a single Hydrologic Engineering Center River Analysis System (HEC-RAS) one-dimensional (1D) steady-flow model, may have adverse effects on the reliability of flood stage and inundation extent predictions. Therefore, a systematic understanding of the uncertainty in the modeling process of FIRMs is necessary. Bayesian model averaging (BMA), which is a statistical approach that can combine estimations from multiple models and produce reliable probabilistic predictions, was applied to evaluating the uncertainty associated with FIRMs. In this study, both the BMA and hierarchical BMA (HBMA) approaches were used to quantify the uncertainty within the detailed FEMA models of the Deep River and the Saint Marys River in the state of Indiana based on water stage predictions from 150 HEC-RAS 1D unsteady-flow model configurations that incorporate four uncertainty sources including bridges, channel roughness, floodplain roughness, and upstream flow input. Given the ensemble predictions and the observed water stage data in the training period, the BMA weight and the variance for each model member were obtained, and then the BMA prediction ability was validated for the observed data from the later period. The results indicate that the BMA prediction is more robust than both the original FEMA model and the ensemble mean. Furthermore, the HBMA framework explicitly shows the propagation of various uncertainty sources, and both the channel roughness and the upstream flow input have a larger impact on prediction variance than bridges. Hence, it provides insights for modelers into the relative impact of individual uncertainty sources in the flood modeling process. The results show that the probabilistic flood maps developed based on the BMA analysis could provide more reliable predictions than the deterministic FIRMs.
引用
收藏
页数:18
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Hierarchical Bayesian uncertainty quantification of Finite Element models using modal statistical information
    Sedehi, Omid
    Papadimitriou, Costas
    Katafygiotis, Lambros S.
    MECHANICAL SYSTEMS AND SIGNAL PROCESSING, 2022, 179
  • [32] Uncertainty Quantification for parameter estimation of an industrial electric motor using hierarchical Bayesian inversion
    Rehme, Michael F.
    John, David N.
    Schick, Michael
    Pflueger, Dirk
    MECHATRONICS, 2023, 92
  • [33] IMPROVING NONLINEAR PROCESS MODELING USING MULTIPLE NEURAL NETWORK COMBINATION THROUGH BAYESIAN MODEL AVERAGING (BMA)
    Ahmad, Z.
    Ha, Tang Pick
    Noor, Rabiatul Adawiah Mat
    IIUM ENGINEERING JOURNAL, 2008, 9 (01): : 19 - 36
  • [34] Bayesian model updating using stochastic distances as uncertainty quantification metrics
    Bi, S.
    Broggi, M.
    Beer, M.
    Zhang, Y.
    PROCEEDINGS OF INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON NOISE AND VIBRATION ENGINEERING (ISMA2018) / INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON UNCERTAINTY IN STRUCTURAL DYNAMICS (USD2018), 2018, : 5157 - 5167
  • [35] Calibration of a distributed flood forecasting model with input uncertainty using a Bayesian framework
    Li, Mingliang
    Yang, Dawen
    Chen, Jinsong
    Hubbard, Susan S.
    WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH, 2012, 48
  • [36] Uncertainty Quantification in Flood Inundation Mapping Using Generalized Likelihood Uncertainty Estimate and Sensitivity Analysis
    Jung, Younghun
    Merwade, Venkatesh
    JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING, 2012, 17 (04) : 507 - 520
  • [37] Bayesian model calibration and uncertainty quantification for an HIV model using adaptive Metropolis algorithms
    Wentworth, Mami T.
    Smith, Ralph C.
    Williams, Brian
    INVERSE PROBLEMS IN SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING, 2018, 26 (02) : 233 - 256
  • [38] Effect of Uncertainty in Historical Data on Flood Frequency Analysis Using Bayesian Method
    Shang, Xiaosan
    Wang, Dong
    Singh, Vijay P.
    Wang, Yuankun
    Wu, Jichun
    Liu, Jiufu
    Zou, Ying
    He, Ruimin
    JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING, 2021, 26 (04)
  • [39] Uncertainty quantification and propagation in bivariate design flood estimation using a Bayesian information-theoretic approach
    Guo, Aijun
    Chang, Jianxia
    Wang, Yimin
    Huang, Qiang
    Li, Yunyun
    JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGY, 2020, 584
  • [40] Model selection in canonical correlation analysis (CCA) using Bayesian model averaging
    Noble, R
    Smith, EP
    Ye, KY
    ENVIRONMETRICS, 2004, 15 (04) : 291 - 311