4.6 Article

Scenario-Based Real-Time Flood Prediction with Logistic Regression

期刊

WATER
卷 13, 期 9, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/w13091191

关键词

real-time; flood extent prediction; logistic regression; scenario-based; database

资金

  1. National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) - Korea government (MOE) [NRF-2020R1I1A3074459]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study proposed a real-time flood extent prediction method which uses logistic regression to generate flood probability discriminants for each grid in the study area, quickly predicting the flood extent with high accuracy.
This study proposed a real-time flood extent prediction method to shorten the time it takes from the flood occurrence to an alert issuance. This method uses logistic regression to generate a flood probability discriminant for each grid constituting the study area, and then predicts the flood extent with the amount of runoff caused by rainfall. In order to generate the flood probability discriminant for each grid, a two-dimensional (2D) flood inundation model was verified by applying the Typhoon Chaba, which caused great damage to the study area in 2016. Then, 100 probability rainfall scenarios were created by combining the return period, duration, and time distribution using past observation rainfall data, and rainfall-runoff-inundation relation databases were built for each scenario by applying hydrodynamic and hydrological models. A flood probability discriminant based on logistic regression was generated for each grid by using whether the grid was flooded (1 or 0) for the runoff amount in the database. When the runoff amount is input to the generated discriminant, the flood probability on the target grid is calculated by the coefficients, so that the flood extent is quickly predicted. The proposed method predicted the flood extent in a few seconds in both cases and showed high accuracy with 83.6 similar to 98.4% and 74.4 similar to 99.1%, respectively, in the application of scenario rainfall and actual rainfall.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据