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
  • [41] Uncertainties quantification of fatigue load mixture model using hierarchical Bayesian models
    Liu, Xiao-Wei
    Lu, Da-Gang
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FATIGUE, 2023, 174
  • [42] Analysis of Climate Campaigns on Social Media using Bayesian Model Averaging
    Islam, Tunazzina
    Zhang, Ruqi
    Goldwasser, Dan
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2023 AAAI/ACM CONFERENCE ON AI, ETHICS, AND SOCIETY, AIES 2023, 2023, : 15 - 25
  • [43] Uncertainty Segregation and Comparative Evaluation in Groundwater Remediation Designs: A Chance-Constrained Hierarchical Bayesian Model Averaging Approach
    Chitsazan, Nima
    Tsai, Frank T. -C.
    JOURNAL OF WATER RESOURCES PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT, 2015, 141 (03)
  • [44] Quantifying Multiple Types of Uncertainty in Physics-Based Simulation Using Bayesian Model Averaging
    Park, Inseok
    Grandhi, Ramana V.
    AIAA JOURNAL, 2011, 49 (05) : 1038 - 1045
  • [45] Treatment of uncertainty using ensemble methods: Comparison of sequential data assimilation and Bayesian model averaging
    Vrugt, Jasper A.
    Robinson, Bruce A.
    WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH, 2007, 43 (01)
  • [46] Bayesian calibration and uncertainty quantification of a rate-dependent cohesive zone model for polymer interfaces
    Thiagarajan, Ponkrshnan
    Sain, Trisha
    Ghosh, Susanta
    ENGINEERING FRACTURE MECHANICS, 2024, 309
  • [47] Bayesian Uncertainty Quantification for Bond Energies and Mobilities Using Path Integral Analysis
    Chang, Joshua C.
    Fok, Pak-Wing
    Chou, Tom
    BIOPHYSICAL JOURNAL, 2015, 109 (05) : 966 - 974
  • [48] Climate informed flood frequency analysis and prediction in Montana using hierarchical Bayesian modeling
    Kwon, Hyun-Han
    Brown, Casey
    Lall, Upmanu
    GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, 2008, 35 (05)
  • [49] How robust are the estimated effects of air pollution on health? Accounting for model uncertainty using Bayesian model averaging
    Pannullo, Francesca
    Lee, Duncan
    Waclawski, Eugene
    Leyland, Alastair H.
    SPATIAL AND SPATIO-TEMPORAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2016, 18 : 53 - 62
  • [50] Accounting for Conceptual Soil Erosion and Sediment Yield Modeling Uncertainty in the APEX Model Using Bayesian Model Averaging
    Wang, X.
    Yen, H.
    Jeong, J.
    Williams, J. R.
    JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING, 2015, 20 (06)