Urban Flood Modeling: Uncertainty Quantification and Physics‐Informed Gaussian Processes Regression Forecasting

Estimating uncertainty in flood model predictions is important for many applications, including risk assessment and flood forecasting. We focus on uncertainty in physics‐based urban flooding models. We consider the effects of the model's complexity and uncertainty in key input parameters. The effect of rainfall intensity on the uncertainty in water depth predictions is also studied. As a test study, we choose the Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing (ICPR) model of a part of the city of Minneapolis. The uncertainty in the ICPR model's predictions of the floodwater depth is quantified in terms of the ensemble variance using the multilevel Monte Carlo (MC) simulation method. Our results show that uncertainties in the studied domain are highly localized. Model simplifications, such as disregarding the groundwater flow, lead to overly confident predictions, that is, predictions that are both less accurate and uncertain than those of the more complex model. We find that for the same number of uncertain parameters, increasing the model resolution reduces uncertainty in the model predictions (and increases the MC method's computational cost). We employ the multilevel MC method to reduce the cost of estimating uncertainty in a high‐resolution ICPR model. Finally, we use the ensemble estimates of the mean and covariance of the flood depth for real‐time flood depth forecasting using the physics‐informed Gaussian process regression method. We show that even with few measurements, the proposed framework results in a more accurate forecast than that provided by the mean prediction of the ICPR model.

[1]  V. Merwade,et al.  An Alternative Approach for Improving Prediction of Integrated Hydrologic‐Hydraulic Models by Assessing the Impact of Intrinsic Spatial Scales , 2021, Water Resources Research.

[2]  Hongshi Xu,et al.  A review on applications of urban flood models in flood mitigation strategies , 2021, Natural Hazards.

[3]  Alexandre M. Tartakovsky,et al.  Physics Information Aided Kriging using Stochastic Simulation Models , 2021, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..

[4]  T. McPhearson,et al.  The Value of Urban Flood Modeling , 2021, Earth's Future.

[5]  D. Tartakovsky,et al.  Accelerated Multilevel Monte Carlo With Kernel‐Based Smoothing and Latinized Stratification , 2020, Water Resources Research.

[6]  Mona Hemmati,et al.  The Role of Urban Growth in Resilience of Communities Under Flood Risk , 2020, Earth's future.

[7]  Venkatesh Merwade,et al.  A Computationally Efficient and Physically Based Approach for Urban Flood Modeling Using a Flexible Spatiotemporal Structure , 2020, Water Resources Research.

[8]  V. Merwade,et al.  Flood inundation modeling and mapping by integrating surface and subsurface hydrology with river hydrodynamics , 2019, Journal of Hydrology.

[9]  Venkatesh Merwade,et al.  Assessing the effect of different bathymetric models on hydraulic simulation of rivers in data sparse regions , 2019, Journal of Hydrology.

[10]  Daniel M. Tartakovsky,et al.  Estimation of distributions via multilevel Monte Carlo with stratified sampling , 2019, J. Comput. Phys..

[11]  David A. Barajas-Solano,et al.  Physics-Informed CoKriging: A Gaussian-Process-Regression-Based Multifidelity Method for Data-Model Convergence , 2018, J. Comput. Phys..

[12]  Ramakrishna Tipireddy,et al.  Physics-informed Machine Learning Method for Forecasting and Uncertainty Quantification of Partially Observed and Unobserved States in Power Grids , 2018, HICSS.

[13]  Vassilios A. Tsihrintzis,et al.  Quantifying roughness coefficient uncertainty in urban flooding simulations through a simplified methodology , 2017 .

[14]  Alberto Guadagnini,et al.  Uncertainty Quantification in Scale‐Dependent Models of Flow in Porous Media , 2017 .

[15]  Demetris Koutsoyiannis,et al.  Comparative evaluation of 1D and quasi-2D hydraulic models based on benchmark and real-world applications for uncertainty assessment in flood mapping , 2016 .

[16]  Philippe Gourbesville,et al.  Spatial Global Sensitivity Analysis of High Resolution classified topographic data use in 2D urban flood modelling , 2016, Environ. Model. Softw..

[17]  Rene A. Camacho,et al.  A Comparison of Bayesian Methods for Uncertainty Analysis in Hydraulic and Hydrodynamic Modeling , 2015 .

[18]  V. Merwade,et al.  Estimation of uncertainty propagation in flood inundation mapping using a 1‐D hydraulic model , 2015 .

[19]  Yoshihisa Kawahara,et al.  The Uncertainty of Local Flow Parameters During Inundation Flow Over Complex Topographies with Elevation Errors , 2013 .

[20]  Patrice E. Carbonneau,et al.  Hydraulic routing of extreme floods in a large ungauged river and the estimation of associated uncertainties: a case study of the Damodar River, India , 2013, Natural Hazards.

[21]  Venkatesh Merwade,et al.  Uncertainty in Flood Inundation Mapping: Current Issues and Future Directions , 2008 .

[22]  Fred L. Ogden,et al.  Gridded Surface Subsurface Hydrologic Analysis (GSSHA) User’s Manual; Version 1.43 for Watershed Modeling System 6.1 , 2006 .

[23]  R. Maxwell,et al.  Integrated surface-groundwater flow modeling: A free-surface overland flow boundary condition in a parallel groundwater flow model , 2006 .

[24]  A. Brath,et al.  A stochastic approach for assessing the uncertainty of rainfall‐runoff simulations , 2004 .

[25]  Daniel M. Tartakovsky,et al.  Unsaturated flow in heterogeneous soils with spatially distributed uncertain hydraulic parameters , 2003 .

[26]  Carl E. Rasmussen,et al.  Gaussian processes for machine learning , 2005, Adaptive computation and machine learning.

[27]  Keith Beven,et al.  Flood frequency estimation by continuous simulation for a catchment treated as ungauged (with uncertainty) , 2002 .

[28]  Zhe Li,et al.  Calculation of Field Manning’s Roughness Coefficient , 2001 .

[29]  T. Sturm,et al.  Open Channel Hydraulics , 2001 .

[30]  M. Taqqu,et al.  Fractionally differenced ARIMA models applied to hydrologic time series: Identification, estimation, and simulation , 1997 .

[31]  Keith Beven,et al.  The future of distributed models: model calibration and uncertainty prediction. , 1992 .

[32]  Jennifer M. McDonald,et al.  S-23 Geologic Map of Minnesota - Quaternary Geology , 2019 .

[33]  Soroosh Sorooshian,et al.  General Review of Rainfall-Runoff Modeling: Model Calibration, Data Assimilation, and Uncertainty Analysis , 2009 .

[34]  V. R. Schneider,et al.  GUIDE FOR SELECTING MANNING'S ROUGHNESS COEFFICIENTS FOR NATURAL CHANNELS AND FLOOD PLAINS , 1989 .