Navigation

On the appropriateness of the Gumbel distribution for modelling extreme rainfall (solicited)

Koutsoyiannis, D., On the appropriateness of the Gumbel distribution for modelling extreme rainfall (solicited), Hydrological Risk: recent advances in peak river flow modelling, prediction and real-time forecasting. Assessment of the impacts of land-use and climate changes, edited by A. Brath, A. Montanari, and E. Toth, Bologna, 303–319, Editoriale Bios, Castrolibero, Italy, 2004.

[doc_id=590]

[English]

For half a century, the Gumbel distribution has been the prevailing model for quantifying risk associated with extreme rainfall. Several arguments including theoretical reasons and empirical evidence are supposed to support the appropriateness of the Gumbel distribution. These arguments are examined thoroughly in this work and are put into question. Moreover, it is shown that the Gumbel distribution may misjudge the hydrological risk as it underestimates seriously the largest extreme rainfall amounts. Besides, it is shown that the three-parameter extreme value distribution of type II is a more consistent alternative and it is discussed how this distribution can be applied even with short hydrological records.

PDF Full text:

Other works that reference this work:

1. Mohymont, B., G.R. Demaree and D.N. Faka, Establishment of IDF-curves for precipitation in the tropical area of Central Africa - comparison of techniques and results, Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 4(3), 375-387, 2004.
2. #Jewson, S., A. Brix and C. Ziehmann, Weather Derivative Valuation: The Meteorological, Statistical, Financial and Mathematical Foundations, Cambridge University Press, 2005.
3. Mohymont, B., and G.R. Demaree, Intensity-duration-frequency curves for precipitation at Yangambi, Congo, derived by means of various models of Montana type, Hydrological Sciences Journal, 51(2), 239-253, 2006.
4. Luna, M.Y., A. Morata, C. Almarza and M.L. Martin, The use of GIS to evaluate and map extreme maximum and minimum temperatures in Spain, Meteorological Applications, 13(04), 385-392, 2006.
5. El Morjanil, Z.E.A., S. Ebener, J. Boos, E. Abdel Ghaffar and A. Musani, Modelling the spatial distribution of five natural hazards in the context of the WHO/EMRO Atlas of Disaster Risk ..., Intern. J. Health Geographics, 6, 8, 1-18, 2007.
6. Saf, B, F. Dikbas and M. Yasar, Determination of regional frequency distributions of floods in West Mediterranean river basins in Turkey, Fresenius Environmental Bulletin, 16(10), 1300-1308, 2007.
7. Melice, J.L., and C.J.C. Reason, Return period of extreme rainfall at George, South Africa South African Journal of Science, 103(11-12), 499-501, 2007.
8. #Erdi, P., Complexity Explained, Springer, 2008.
9. El Adlouni, S., B. Bobee and T.B.M.J. Ouarda, On the tails of extreme event distributions in hydrology, Journal of Hydrology, 355(1-4), 2008.
10. Aryal, G. R., and C. P. Tsokos, On the transmuted extreme value distribution with application, Nonlinear Analysis: Theory, Methods & Applications, 2009.
11. Benabdesselam, T., and Y. Hammar, Estimation de la Réponse hydrologique d’un bassin versant urbanisé, European Journal of Scientific Research, 29 (3), 334-348, 2009.
12. Zin, W. Z. W., A. A. Jemain and K. Ibrahim, The best fitting distribution of annual maximum rainfall in Peninsular Malaysia based on methods of L-moment and LQ-moment, Theor. Appl. Climatol., 96 (3-4), 337-344, 2009.
13. Zawiah, W. Z. W., A. A. Jemain, K. Ibrahim, J. Suhaila and M. D. Sayang, A comparative study of extreme rainfall in peninsular Malaysia with reference to partial duration and annual extreme series, Sains Malaysiana, 38(5)(): 751–760, 2009.

Tagged under: Extremes, Rainfall models