Abstract
The National Capital Region of India (NCR Delhi) receives around 26 rainy days with majority of short duration high intensity rainfall events. Yet, the city faces severe waterlogging during south-west monsoon, and shortage of water in other seasons due to rapid urbanization and changing hydrological flow patterns. In an uncertain scenario, where spatiotemporal variability of rainfall at local scale is not very well understood, a location-specific robust model applicable for the megacity through interpretation of parameter estimates will improve understanding of extreme rainfall pattern with duration. Identification of the best-fit statistical model for prediction of short duration extreme events is done and parameters of the model are evaluated for different durations. The study finds that the 2-parameter gamma distribution and 3-parameter generalized extreme value (GEV) predict similar return levels of extreme intensity for short durations and short return periods. The shape parameter in GEV and shape and scale parameters in gamma explain the extreme quantile in the distribution responsible for prediction of high magnitude events. The more generic gamma model is robust and applicable at local scale, with pronounced shape parameter variations across durations (1–11.534, 2–8.264, 3–6.609 h). It is concluded that the knowledge of hourly variation in extreme rainfall events will help in informed decision making in this acutely water-stressed region of the world.
Highlights
-
Short duration extreme rainfall events are frequent in semi-arid urban regions and characterization of these storms is important. The extreme rainfall pattern characteristics is defined through the parameter estimates of shape and scale of gamma distribution.
-
Within 1 h duration rainfall events pattern, the higher shape factor identifies storms in a more wet regime (α-14.05) than the mean (α-11.534), while the lower shape factor identifies dry regime (α-9.018).
-
The 4 h and 6 h events have the lowest shape factor and high scale factor, implying variation, and unpredictability.
-
Short duration storms have the potential to cause flash floods, the hydrological insights provided by this study will be useful in similar geographical regions.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aksoy H 2000 Use of gamma distribution in hydrological analysis; Turkish J. Eng. Environ. Sci. 24(6) 419–428.
Alam M, Emura K, Farnham C and Yuan J 2018 Best-fit probability distributions and return periods for maximum monthly rainfall in Bangladesh; Climate, https://doi.org/10.3390/cli6010009.
Ali H and Mishra V 2018 Increase in subdaily precipitation extremes in India under 1.5 and 2.0°C warming worlds; Geophys. Res. Lett. 45 6972–6982, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018GL078689.
Ayyub B M and McCuen R H 2011 Probability, statistics, and reliability for engineers and scientists; 3rd edn, CRC Press, New York.
Barbero R, Fowler H J and Blenkinsop S et al. 2019 A synthesis of hourly and daily precipitation extremes in different climatic regions; Wea. Clim. Extrem. 26 100219, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wace.2019.100219.
Ben-Gai T, Bitan A and Manes A et al. 1998 Spatial and temporal changes in rainfall frequency distribution patterns in Israel; Theor. Appl. Climatol., https://doi.org/10.1007/s007040050062.
Bhatla R, Verma S, Pandey R and Tripathi A 2019 Evolution of extreme rainfall events over Indo-Gangetic plain in changing climate during 1901–2010; J. Earth Syst. Sci. 128, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12040-019-1162-1.
Boudrissa N, Cheraitia H and Halimi L 2017 Modelling maximum daily yearly rainfall in northern Algeria using generalized extreme value distributions from 1936 to 2009; Meteorol. Appl., https://doi.org/10.1002/met.1610.
Cahill A T 2003 Significance of AIC differences for precipitation intensity distributions; Adv. Water. Resour., https://doi.org/10.1016/S0309-1708(02)00167-7.
Census of India 2011 Provisional population totals; New Delhi.
Darwish M M, Fowler H J, Blenkinsop S and Tye M R 2018 A regional frequency analysis of UK sub-daily extreme precipitation and assessment of their seasonality; Int. J. Climatol. 38 4758–4776, https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.5694.
Ercelebl S G and Toros H 2009 Extreme value analysis of Istanbul air pollution data. Clean – Soil, Air, Water, https://doi.org/10.1002/clen.200800041.
Fawcett L and Green A C 2018 Bayesian posterior predictive return levels for environmental extremes; Stoch. Environ. Res. Risk Assess. 32 2233–2252, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-018-1561-x.
Ganguli P and Coulibaly P 2019 Assessment of future changes in intensity-duration-frequency curves for Southern Ontario using North American (NA)-CORDEX models with nonstationary methods; J. Hydrol. Reg. Stud. 22 100587, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrh.2018.12.007.
Gnedenko B V 1943 Sur la distribution limite du terme maximum d’une s´erie al´eatoire; Ann. Math. 44 423–453.
Goswami B N, Venugopal V and Sangupta D et al. 2006 Increasing trend of extreme rain events over India in a warming environment; Science 314(5804) 1442–1445, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1132027.
Groisman P Y, Karl T R and Easterling D R et al. 1999 Changes in the probability of heavy precipitation: Important indicators of climatic change; Clim. Change, https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005432803188.
Groisman P Y, Knight R W and Karl T R 2012 Changes in intense precipitation over the central United States; J. Hydrometeorol. 13 47–66, https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-11-039.1.
Guerreiro S B, Fowler H J and Barbero R et al. 2018 Detection of continental-scale intensification of hourly rainfall extremes; Nat. Clim. Change 8 803–807; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0245-3.
Guhathakurta P, Rajeevan M, Sikka D R and Tyagi A 2015 Observed changes in southwest monsoon rainfall over India during 1901–2011; Int. J. Climatol., https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.4095.
Gumbel E J 1935 Les valeurs extr`emes des distributions statistiques; Ann. Inst. HenriPoincare 4 115–158.
Gupta A K and Nair S S 2010 Urban floods in Bangalore and Chennai: Risk management challenges and lessons for sustainable urban ecology; Curr. Sci. 100(11) 1638–1645.
Hailegeorgis T T and Alfredsen K 2017 Analyses of extreme precipitation and runoff events including uncertainties and reliability in design and management of urban water infrastructure; J. Hydrol., https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2016.11.037.
Hosking J R M 2018 L-Moments: Analysis and estimation of distributions using linear combinations of order statistics; J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2517-6161.1990.tb01775.x.
Huard D, Mailhot A and Duchesne S 2010 Bayesian estimation of intensity–duration–frequency curves and of the return period associated to a given rainfall event; Stoch. Environ. Res. Risk. Assess., https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-009-0323-1.
Husak G J, Michaelsen J and Funk C 2007 Use of the gamma distribution to represent monthly rainfall in Africa for drought monitoring applications; Int. J. Climatol., https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.1441.
Katz R W, Parlange M B and Naveau P 2002 Statistics of extremes in hydrology; Adv. Water Resour., https://doi.org/10.1016/S0309-1708(02)00056-8.
Kishtawal C M, Niyogi D and Tewari M et al. 2010 Urbanization signature in the observed heavy rainfall climatology over India; Int. J. Climatol., https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.2044.
Kottegoda N T and Rosso R 2008 Applied statistics for civil and environmental engineers; Blackwell Publishers.
Koutsoyiannis D 2004 Statistics of extremes and estimation of extreme rainfall. II: Empirical investigation of long rainfall records; Hydrol. Sci. J. 49 591–610, https://doi.org/10.1623/hysj.49.4.591.54424.
Laio F, Di Baldassarre G and Montanari A 2009 Model selection techniques for the frequency analysis of hydrological extremes; Water Resour. Res., https://doi.org/10.1029/2007WR006666.
Martinez‐Villalobos C and Neelin J D 2018 Shifts in precipitation accumulation extremes during the warm season over the United States; Geophys. Res. Lett. 45 8586–8595, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018GL078465.
Martinez-Villalobos C and Neelin J D 2019 Why do precipitation intensities tend to follow Gamma distributions? J. Atmos. Sci., https://doi.org/10.1175/jas-d-18-0343.1.
Mondal A and Mujumdar P P 2015 Modeling non-stationarity in intensity, duration and frequency of extreme rainfall over India; J. Hydrol., https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.11.071.
Muller C J, Back L E, O’Gorman P A and Emanuel K A 2009 A model for the relationship between tropical precipitation and column water vapor; Geophys. Res. Lett. 36 L16804, https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GL039667.
Nadarajah S and Choi D 2007 Maximum daily rainfall in South Korea; J. Earth Syst. Sci., https://doi.org/10.1007/s12040-007-0028-0.
NCR Planning Board 2016 Functional Plan on Drainage for National Capital Region; New Delhi.
Papalexiou S M, Koutsoyiannis D and Makropoulos C 2013 How extreme is extreme? An assessment of daily rainfall distribution tails; Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 17 851–862. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-17-851-2013.
Paul S and Nagendra H 2015 Vegetation change and fragmentation in the mega city of Delhi: Mapping 25 years of change; Appl. Geogr. 58 153–166, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2015.02.001.
Prein A F, Rasmussen R M and Ikeda K et al. 2017 The future intensification of hourly precipitation extremes; Nat. Clim. Change 7 48–52, https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate3168.
Ragulina G and Reitan T 2017 Generalized extreme value shape parameter and its nature for extreme precipitation using long time series and the Bayesian approach; Hydrol. Sci. J. 62 863–879, https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2016.1260134.
Rana A, Uvo C B, Bengtsson L and Sarthi P P 2012 Trend analysis for rainfall in Delhi and Mumbai, India; Clim. Dyn., https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-011-1083-4.
Sharma P, Khare M and Chakrabarti S P 1999 Application of extreme value theory for predicting violations of air quality standards for an urban road intersection; Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ., https://doi.org/10.1016/S1361-9209(99)00006-1.
Sinha Ray K C and Srivastava A K 2000 Is there any change in extreme events like heavy rainfall? Curr. Sci. 79(2) 155–158.
Smith R L and Naylor J C 1987 Statistics of the three-parameter weibull distribution; Ann. Oper. Res., https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02054756.
Stephenson D B, Kumar K R and Doblas-Reyes F J et al. 2002 Extreme daily rainfall events and their impact on ensemble forecasts of the Indian Monsoon; Mon. Weather Rev., https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(1999)127%3c1954:edreat%3e2.0.co;2.
Thom H C S 1958 A note on the gamma distribution; Mon. Weather Rev. 86 117–122.
Trenberth K 2011 Changes in precipitation with climate change; Clim. Res. 47 123–138, https://doi.org/10.3354/cr00953.
Watterson I G 2005 Simulated changes due to global warming in the variability of precipitation, and their interpretation using a gamma-distributed stochastic model; Adv. Water Resour., https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2004.11.016.
Waylen P, Keellings D and Qiu Y 2012 Climate and health in Florida: Changes in risks of annual maximum temperatures in the second half of the twentieth century; Appl. Geogr., https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2011.06.007.
Westra S, Fowler H J and Evans J P et al. 2014 Future changes to the intensity and frequency of short-duration extreme rainfall; Rev. Geophys. 52 522–555, https://doi.org/10.1002/2014RG000464.
Wilby R L and Wigley T M L 2002 Future changes in the distribution of daily precipitation totals across North America; Geophys. Res. Lett. 29 1999–2002, https://doi.org/10.1029/2001GL013048.
Wilks D S 2002 Maximum Likelihood estimation for the gamma distribution using data containing zeros; J. Clim., https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(1990)003%3c1495:mleftg%3e2.0.co;2.
Willmott C J 1982 Some comments on the evaluation of model performance; Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc., https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0477(1982)063%3c1309:SCOTEO%3e2.0.CO;2.
Zhang X, Wan H and Zwiers F W et al. 2013 Attributing intensification of precipitation extremes to human influence; Geophys. Res. Lett. 40 5252–5257, https://doi.org/10.1002/grl.51010.
Acknowledgements
The authors highly appreciate the reviewer comments which helped to improve the manuscript. The authors would also like to thank India Meteorological Department (IMD) for providing the necessary meteorological records for this study. The authors would like to thank the TERI SAS library for coordinating with IMD to provide data and their colleague Dr Sherly M A for going through the manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Communicated by Rajib Maity
Appendices
Appendix 1
The pdf of GEV, gamma and lognormal distributions are given below.
The probability density function (pdf) of GEV is given by:
where the three parameters of the GEV are defined as \( \mu \) = location parameter, \( \sigma \) = scale parameter, \( {{\xi }} \) = shape parameter and x is the independent rainfall intensity variable. When the shape factor (\( {{\xi }} \)) is zero, the distribution reduces to 2-parameter distribution Gumbel which is the most common EV1 distribution.
The gamma probability distribution function (pdf) is shown in equation (A1.2) as follows (Wilks 2002):
The parameters of the gamma distribution are α: shape factor, β: scale factor and Γ(α): the gamma function.
The pdf of lognormal distribution is shown in equation (A1.3) as follows (Kottegoda and Rosso 2008):
where the location factor is μln(x) and scale factor is σln(x), respectively.
Appendix 2: Akaike Information Criterion (AIC)
The Akaike Information Criterion (Cahill 2003) uses the discrepancy measure between the true model (which is unknown) and the approximate model, in terms of the negative log likelihood (nllh) value. It is an alternative procedure for statistical tests for flood frequency analysis (Laio et al. 2009). The AIC is considered robust as the method measures the amount of information lost, so the model which loses the least information has the best model quality. Thus, the model with least AIC value is chosen as the best model. AIC(p) is sometimes used instead of AIC, which adds the sum of number of parameter (as p) to the nllh value of the distribution, it has been used to choose the best-fit distribution for estimating intensity duration frequency (IDF) of extreme rainfall in India at regional scale (Mondal and Mujumdar 2015). It is a method of selecting a model from a set of models by calculating the Kullback–Leibler distance between the true model and the observed (Laio et al. 2009) as follows:
2.1 Index of agreement
The prediction ability of the gamma and GEV models with the observed AMS may be evaluated using the index of agreement method-d (Willmott 1982) which is sensitive to extreme values. It has been used to evaluate model performance in the field of environment, hydrology and agrometeorology (Sharma et al. 1999).
d varies between 0 and 1, observed value in AMS is Oi, O is mean of observed values, Pi is the predicted model value. The higher the value of index d, better is the model performance, with high values of d as the best fit, indicating better predicted model fit to the observed values.
Author statement
The research methodology was designed by Prof Prateek Sharma, Ms Ranjana Ray Chaudhuri carried out the research and data analysis and wrote the manuscript. Prof Prateek Sharma supervised the research and data analysis and refined the ideas and contributed in finalizing the paper.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Chaudhuri, R.R., Sharma, P. An integrated stochastic approach for extreme rainfall analysis in the National Capital Region of India. J Earth Syst Sci 130, 16 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12040-020-01510-0
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12040-020-01510-0