Evaluating the impact of post-processing medium-range ensemble streamflow forecasts from the European Flood Awareness System

Abstract

Abstract. Streamflow forecasts provide vital information to aid emergency response preparedness and disaster risk reduction. Medium-range forecasts are created by forcing a hydrological model with output from numerical weather prediction systems. Uncertainties are unavoidably introduced throughout the system and can reduce the skill of the streamflow forecasts. Post-processing is a method used to quantify and reduce the overall uncertainties in order to improve the usefulness of the forecasts. The post-processing method that is used within the operational European Flood Awareness System is based on the model conditional processor and the ensemble model output statistics method. Using 2 years of reforecasts with daily timesteps, this method is evaluated for 522 stations across Europe. Post-processing was found to increase the skill of the forecasts at the majority of stations in terms of both the accuracy of the forecast median and the reliability of the forecast probability distribution. This improvement is seen at all lead times (up to 15 d) but is largest at short lead times. The greatest improvement was seen in low-lying, large catchments with long response times, whereas for catchments at high elevation and with very short response times the forecasts often failed to capture the magnitude of peak flows. Additionally, the quality and length of the observational time series used in the offline calibration of the method were found to be important. This evaluation of the post-processing method, and specifically the new information provided on characteristics that affect the performance of the method, will aid end users in making more informed decisions. It also highlights the potential issues that may be encountered when developing new post-processing methods.

Calibrated river-level estimation from river cameras using convolutional neural networks

“…According to the EA documentation (EA, 2021), the gauge metadata includes a Typical High water-level threshold set to the 95th percentile of all the water levels measured at that gauge since its installation. This threshold was chosen as the flood threshold in this work as it was available for most of our gauges, and as percentile thresholds are regularly used to evaluate peak discharge (Matthews et al, 2022). When this threshold was not available as metadata (e.g., gauges in the Republic of Ireland), if a camera was associated with this gauge, it was removed for this specific experiment.…”

Recent Advances and New Frontiers in Riverine and Coastal Flood Modeling

“…Both observations and forecasts contain uncertainties and systematic errors. To improve forecasts by reducing uncertainties and errors, statistical or ML‐type methods can be applied to both the incoming meteorological variables, such as temperature, evaporation, or precipitation and the forecast outputs of hydrological variables, such as river discharge/streamflow, flood depth or extent (Khajehei & Moradkhani, 2017; Madadgar et al., 2014; Matthews et al., 2022; Wetterhall & Smith, 2019). These errors are considered in terms of different attributes of “forecast quality.”…”

Connecting hydrological modelling and forecasting from global to local scales: Perspectives from an international joint virtual workshop

“…Presentations on the advances in pre-processing techniques were centred around increasing the skill of precipitation predictions (especially of intense and rare events) at subseasonal and In conclusion, the improvements brought by pre/post-processing techniques were conditioned on many factors: the catchments' characteristics ([GM-P]; Matthews et al, 2022), the hydrometeorological variable [AC-P], and the method implemented [FJ-P]. In fact, many presentations suggested that selecting suitable methods is rather application-dependent [WP-K; FT-P; WG-P; AB1-P].…”