2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2011.01.032
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of detrending methods for fluctuation analysis in hydrology

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
38
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

3
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 48 publications
(40 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
2
38
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Figure 7 highlights that the h(2) values follow two different statistical distributions for the two classes of time scales, and ARFIMA, gHK and IAAFT are able to reproduce this behavior, whereas HK models (with ML and DFA estimates of H) do no reproduce the crossover at all (since H ∈ (0, 1), we refer to Serinaldi [11] and references therein for the interpretation of DFA H values greater than unity). These results are in agreement with those reported by Kantelhardt et al [19] with differences mainly related to a different choice of the crossover time scale, and confirm that the crossover results from the interplay of SRD and LRD, rather than residual seasonality as is sometimes argued in the literature [65]. Compared with previous studies, the crossover attribution relies on the use of models that explicitly account for both SRD and LRD with different degrees of complexity, and allow the simultaneous reproduction of short and long term dynamics, thus further strengthening conclusions concerning the nature of the crossover.…”
Section: Climacogram Analysis and Dfa: Highlighting Srd And Lrdsupporting
confidence: 93%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Figure 7 highlights that the h(2) values follow two different statistical distributions for the two classes of time scales, and ARFIMA, gHK and IAAFT are able to reproduce this behavior, whereas HK models (with ML and DFA estimates of H) do no reproduce the crossover at all (since H ∈ (0, 1), we refer to Serinaldi [11] and references therein for the interpretation of DFA H values greater than unity). These results are in agreement with those reported by Kantelhardt et al [19] with differences mainly related to a different choice of the crossover time scale, and confirm that the crossover results from the interplay of SRD and LRD, rather than residual seasonality as is sometimes argued in the literature [65]. Compared with previous studies, the crossover attribution relies on the use of models that explicitly account for both SRD and LRD with different degrees of complexity, and allow the simultaneous reproduction of short and long term dynamics, thus further strengthening conclusions concerning the nature of the crossover.…”
Section: Climacogram Analysis and Dfa: Highlighting Srd And Lrdsupporting
confidence: 93%
“…These local trends are defined as local linear or polynomial regressions in DFA (a three-order polynomial is used in this study) [10,[59][60][61]. It should be noted that LRD diagnostics are commonly affected by the presence of seasonal/cyclic patterns [6,[62][63][64][65][66]; therefore, the deseasonalization procedure in Equation (1) provides a simple but effective way to handle this aspect.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Hu et al [39] showed that a periodic trend induces an artificial crossover at the scale of the sinusoidal periodicity. This crossover leads to difficulties in analyzing data in a sense that it makes the estimation of scaling exponent unreliable [41]. Therefore, to measure the scaling exponent correctly, we have to minimize the effect of such trends in the data before applying the MF-DFA.…”
Section: B Singular Value Decompositionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Detrended analysis can quantify the contributions of variables with significant trends. By removing significant increases or decreases and recalculating the reference ET with the detrended data set, several papers have analyzed the contributions of climatic variables to reference ET or actual ET [11,[30][31][32][33]. For example, Xu found that a decrease in net total radiation was the main cause of the decrease in reference ET in the Yangtze catchment from 1960 to 2000 [30].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%