Separation of Skewness: Reality of Regional Artifact?
Publication: Journal of Hydraulic Engineering
Volume 118, Issue 3
Abstract
Statistical distributions have often been used to estimate future flood probabilities based on a past record of flood events. To choose such distributions, one study in the United States considered a number of hydrologically homogeneous regions and examined the coefficient of skevvness of annual flood series in these regions. It concluded that the skewness of flood series was, for each of the regions, more variable than that calculated from data sets generated randomly from a group of commonly used distributions. It referred to this phenomenon as the condition of separation (of skewness) or separation effect. Some authors have set a criterion that for a distribution to be adequate for flood frequency analysis it must be able to explain this separation phenomenon. We examine this problem and show that one primary cause of this phenomenon is the spatial mixing of skewness values within the same region. We conclude that one is not justified in using the separation of skewness as a criterion for choosing the type of distribution to be used in a flood frequency analysis.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
Ahmad, M. I., Sinclair, C. D., and Werritty, A. (1988). “Log‐logistic flood frequency analysis.” J. Hydrol., 98, 205–224.
2.
Arnell, N. W., and Beran, M. A. (1987). “Testing the suitability of the two‐component extreme value distribution for regional flood estimation.” Regional flood frequency analysis, V. P. Singh, ed., D. Reidel, Hingham, Mass., 159–175.
3.
Ashkar, F., and Bobée, B. (1989). “Reflection on some problems of flood frequency analysis.” EOS: Trans., American Geophysical Union 70(15), 325.
4.
Bobée, and Ashkar, F. (1989). Comment on “Log‐logistic flood frequency analysis,” by M. I. Ahmad, C. D. Sinclair, and A. Warrity. J. Hydrol., 107, 367–372.
5.
Efron, B. (1977). “Bootstrap methods: Another look at the Jacknife.” Technical Report No. 32, Stanford Univ., Palo Alto, Calif.
6.
Houghton, J. C. (1978). “Birth of a parent: The Wakeby distribution for modeling flood flows.” Water Resour. Res., 14(16), 1105–1110.
7.
Klemes, V. (1976). Comment on “Regional skew in search for a parent,” by N. C. Matalas, J. R. Slack, and J. R. Wallis. Water Resour. Res., 12(6), 1325–1326.
8.
Kuczera, G. (1982). “Robust flood frequency models.” Water Resour. Res., 18(2), 315–324.
9.
Landwehr, J. M., Matalas, N. C., and Wallis, J. R. (1978). “Some comparisons of flood statistics in real and log space.” Water Resour. Res., 14(5), 902–920.
10.
Matalas, N. C., Slack, J. R., and Wallis, J. R. (1975). “Regional skew in search for a parent.” Water Resour. Res., 11(6), 815–826.
11.
Rossi, F., Fiorentino, M., and Versace, P. (1984). “Two component extreme value distribution for flood frequency analysis.” Water Resour. Res., 20(7), 847–856.
12.
'Statistical distributions for flood frequency analysis.” (1989). Operational Hydrology Report No. 33, World Meteorological Organization (WMO), Geneva, Switzerland.
13.
Wallis, J. R., Matalas, N. C., and Slack, J. R. (1974). “Just a moment!” Water Resour. Res., 10(2), 211–219.
14.
Wallis, J. R., Matalas, N. C., and Slack, J. R. (1977). “Apparent regional skew.” Water Resour. Res., 13(1), 159–182.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Hydraulic Engineering
Volume 118 • Issue 3 • March 1992
Pages: 460 - 475
Copyright
Copyright © 1992 ASCE.
History
Published online: Mar 1, 1992
Published in print: Mar 1992
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.