Estimation of extreme Component-wise Excess design realization: a hydrological application

  • E. Di Bernardino
  • F. Palacios-Rodríguez
Original Paper


The classic univariate risk measure in environmental sciences is the Return Period (RP). The RP is traditionally defined as “the average time elapsing between two successive realizations of a prescribed event”. The notion of design quantile related with RP is also of great importance. The design quantile represents the “value of the variable(s) characterizing the event associated with a given RP”. Since an individual risk may strongly be affected by the degree of dependence amongst all risks, the need for the provision of multivariate design quantiles has gained ground. In contrast to the univariate case, the design quantile definition in the multivariate setting presents certain difficulties. In particular, Salvadori, G., De Michele, C. and Durante F. define in the paper called “On the return period and design in a multivariate framework” (Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 15:3293–3305, 2011) the design realization as the vector that maximizes a weight function given that the risk vector belongs to a given critical layer of its joint multivariate distribution function. In this paper, we provide the explicit expression of the aforementioned multivariate risk measure in the Archimedean copula setting. Furthermore, this measure is estimated by using Extreme Value Theory techniques and the asymptotic normality of the proposed estimator is studied. The performance of our estimator is evaluated on simulated data. We conclude with an application on a real hydrological data-set.


Multivariate design quantile Extreme Value Theory Return period Archimedean copula Hydrological application 



The authors thank the associated editor and the referees whose comments helped to improve a previous version of this paper. Furthermore, the authors thank Gianfausto Salvadori and Fabrizio Durante for fruitful discussions. This work was partly supported by a grant from the Junta de Andalucía (Spain) for research group (FQM- 328) and by a pre-doctoral contract (Palacios Rodríguez, F.) from the “V Plan Propio de Investigación” of the University of Seville.


  1. Ahmed K, Shahid S, bin Harun S, Wang XJ (2016) Characterization of seasonal droughts in Balochistan Province, Pakistan. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 30(2):747–762CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Boche H, Jorswieck EA (2007) Majorization and matrix-monotone functions in wireless communications. Now Publishers Inc., DelftGoogle Scholar
  3. Cai JJ, Einmahl JHJ, de Haan L, Zhou C (2015) Estimation of the marginal expected shortfall: the mean when a related variable is extreme. J R Stat Soc Ser B Stat Methodol 77(2):417–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chebana F, Ouarda TBMJ (2011) Multivariate quantiles in hydrological frequency analysis. Environmetrics 22:63–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. de Haan L, Ferreira A (2006) Extreme value theory, an introduction. Springer series in operations research and financial engineering. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. De Michele C, Salvadori G, Canossi M, Petaccia A, Rosso R (2005) Bivariate statistical approach to check adequacy of dam spillway. J Hydrol Eng 10(1):50–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. De Paola F, Ranucci A (2012) Analysis of spatial variability for stormwater capture tanks assessment. Irrig Drain 61(5):682–690CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. De Paola F, Ranucci A, Feo A (2013) Antecedent moisture condition (SCS) frequency assessment: a case study in Southern Italy. Irrig Drain 62:61–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Denuit M, Dhaene J, Goovaerts M, Kaas R (2005) Actuarial theory for dependence risks: measures orders and models. Wiley, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Di Bernardino E, Fernández-Ponce J, Palacios-Rodríguez F, Rodríguez-Griñolo M (2015) On multivariate extensions of the conditional value-at-risk measure. Insur Math Econ 61:1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Di Bernardino E, Rullière D (2014) On tail dependence coefficients of transformed multivariate Archimedean copulas. Working paper.
  12. Dolati A, Dehgan Nezhad A (2014) Some results on convexity and concavity of multivariate copulas. Iran J Math Sci Inf 9(2):87–100Google Scholar
  13. Durante F (2006) New results on copulas and related concepts. Ph.D. thesis. Università degli Studi di Lecce. ItalyGoogle Scholar
  14. Durante F, Okhrin O (2015) Estimation procedures for exchangeable Marshall copulas with hydrological application. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 29(1):205–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Einmahl J, De Haan L, Piterbarg V (2001) Nonparametric estimation of the spectral measure of an extreme value distribution. Ann Stat 29(5):1401–1423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Einmahl J, Segers J (2009) Maximum empirical likelihood estimation of the spectral measure of an extreme-value distribution. Ann Stat 37(5B):2953–2989CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fawcett L, Walshaw D (2016) Sea-surge and wind speed extremes: optimal estimation strategies for planners and engineers. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 30(2):463–480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hill BM (1975) A simple general approach to inference about the tail of a distribution. Ann Stat 3(5):1163–1174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jaworski P (2013) The limiting properties of copulas under univariate conditioning. In: Copulae in mathematical and quantitative finance, vol 213. Lecture Notes in Statistics, Springer, Heidelberg, pp 129–163Google Scholar
  20. Mao T, Hu T (2012) Second-order properties of the Haezendonck–Goovaerts risk measure for extreme risks. Insur Math Econ 51:333–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Marshall A, Olkin I, Arnold BC (2011) Inequalities: theory of majorization and its applications, 2nd edn. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. McNeil A, Nešlehová J (2009) Multivariate archimedean copulas, d-monotone functions and \(l_1-\)norm symmetric distributions. Ann Stat 37(5B):3059–3097CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Nelsen RB (2006) An introduction to copulas. Springer series in statistics. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  24. Papalexiou SM, Koutsoyiannis D, Makropoulos C (2013) How extreme is extreme? An assessment of daily rainfall distribution tails. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 17:851–862CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Pappadà R, Perrone E, Durante F, Salvadori G (2016) Spin-off extreme value and archimedean copulas for estimating the bivariate structural risk. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 30(1):327–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Pavlopoulos H, Picek J, Jurečková J (2008) Heavy tailed durations of regional rainfall. Appl Math 53(3):249–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Requena AI, Chebana F, Mediero L (2016) A complete procedure for multivariate index-flood model application. J Hydrol 535:559–580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Saad C, El Adlouni S, St-Hilaire A, Gachon P (2015) A nested multivariate copula approach to hydrometeorological simulations of spring floods: the case of the Richelieu River (Québec, Canada) record flood. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 29(1):275–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Salvadori G, De Michele C, Durante F (2011) On the return period and design in a multivariate framework. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 15:3293–3305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Salvadori G, Durante F, De Michele C, Bernardi M, Petrella L (2016) A multivariate copula-based framework for dealing with hazard scenarios and failure probabilities. Water Resour Res 52(5):3701–3721CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Salvadori G, Durante F, Perrone E (2013) Semi-parametric approximation of Kendall’s distribution function and multivariate return periods. J Soc Fr Stat 154(1):151–173Google Scholar
  32. Salvadori G, Tomasicchio GR, D’Alessandro F (2014) Practical guidelines for multivariate analysis and design in coastal and off-shore engineering. Coast Eng 88:1–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Serfling R (1980) Approximation theorems of mathematical statistics. Wiley, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Serfling R (2002) Quantile functions for multivariate analysis: approaches and applications. Stat Neerl 56(2):214–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Serinaldi F (2015a) Can we tell more than we can know? The limits of bivariate drought analyses in the United States. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess. doi: 10.1007/s00477-015-1124-3
  36. Serinaldi F (2015b) Dismissing return periods!. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 29(4):1179–1189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Serinaldi F, Kilsby CG (2015) Stationarity is undead: uncertainty dominates the distribution of extremes. Adv Water Resour 77:17–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Singh V, Jain S, Tyagi A (2007) Risk and reliability analysis. ASCE Press, RestonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Torres R, Lillo RE, Laniado H (2015) A directional multivariate value at risk. Insur Math Econ 65:111–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Vandenberghe S, van den Berg MJ, Gräler B, Petroselli A, Grimaldi S, De Baets B, Verhoest NEC (2012) Joint return periods in hydrology: a critical and practical review focusing on synthetic design hydrograph estimation. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci Dis 9:6781–6828CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Volpi E, Fiori A (2014) Hydraulic structures subject to bivariate hydrological loads: return period, design, and risk assessment. Water Resour Res 50(2):885–897CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Zhang R, Chen X, Cheng Q, Zhang Z, Shi P (2016) Joint probability of precipitation and reservoir storage for drought estimation in the headwater basin of the Huaihe River, China. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess. doi: 10.1007/s00477-016-1249-z

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Département IMATH, Laboratoire Cédric EA4629CNAMParis Cedex 03France
  2. 2.Departamento de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, Facultad de MatemáticasUniversidad de SevillaSevilleSpain

Personalised recommendations