Underestimation of Frequent Floods when Using Annual Maxima for
Frequency Analysis: Drivers, Spatial Variability, and Possible Solutions
Abstract
Because they are conceptually unable to consider events at the
sub-annual scale, probabilistic flood analyses based on annual maxima
(AM) underestimate the actual frequency of frequent floods (with return
periods under 5 years), so that peaks-over-threshold (POT) approaches
should be preferred. While this has been acknowledged for decades,
frequent floods are still estimated too often using AM, probably because
the procedure is simpler, and AM series are longer and easier to obtain.
However, the negative bias incurred when performing flood frequency with
AM can be severe. This affects fields such as river restoration, stream
ecology, and fluvial geomorphology, which require a correct
characterization of frequent floods. Using hundreds of U.S. watersheds
with natural flow regimes, across different climatic and geomorphic
conditions, we systematically study the variability in how AM frequency
analyses underestimate frequent floods, finding clear spatial patterns.
Exploiting the duality between the Generalized Extreme Value and the
Generalized Pareto distributions (used for modeling AM and POT,
respectively), we identify the drivers of frequent-flood
underestimation, studying the influence of the distributions’ shapes. In
turn, with the support of an optimal feature-selection technique, we
determine the physical drivers explaining underestimation, from a wide
spectrum of basin descriptors, investigating their linkages with the
distributional characteristics that affect underestimation. A
theoretical relationship is derived to infer the underestimation rate,
allowing for post-hoc correction of AM-predicted frequent floods,
without the need to perform POT frequency analyses. However, this
approach underperforms at sites with mixed flood populations.