Advances in surrogate modeling for storm surge prediction: storm selection and addressing characteristics related to climate change
- 353 Downloads
This paper establishes various advancements for the application of surrogate modeling techniques for storm surge prediction utilizing an existing database of high-fidelity, synthetic storms (tropical cyclones). Kriging, also known as Gaussian process regression, is specifically chosen as the surrogate model in this study. Emphasis is first placed on the storm selection for developing the database of synthetic storms. An adaptive, sequential selection is examined here that iteratively identifies the storm (or multiple storms) that is expected to provide the greatest enhancement of the prediction accuracy when that storm is added into the already available database. Appropriate error statistics are discussed for assessing convergence of this iterative selection, and its performance is compared to the joint probability method with optimal sampling, utilizing the required number of synthetic storms to achieve the same level of accuracy as comparison metric. The impact on risk estimation is also examined. The discussion then moves to adjustments of the surrogate modeling framework to support two implementation issues that might become more relevant due to climate change considerations: future storm intensification and sea level rise (SLR). For storm intensification, the use of the surrogate model for prediction extrapolation is examined. Tuning of the surrogate model characteristics using cross-validation techniques and modification of the tuning to prioritize storms with specific characteristics are proposed, whereas an augmentation of the database with new/additional storms is also considered. With respect to SLR, the recently developed database for the US Army Corps of Engineers’ North Atlantic Comprehensive Coastal Study is exploited to demonstrate how surrogate modeling can support predictions that include SLR considerations.
KeywordsKriging Storm surge Storm selection Surrogate model extrapolation Gaussian process regression Sea level rise
This work has been done under contract with the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Engineer Research and Development Center, Coastal and Hydraulics Laboratory (ERDC-CHL). The support of the USACE’s Flood and Coastal R&D Program is also gratefully acknowledged.
The funding was provided by Engineer Research and Development (Grant No. W912HZ-16-P-0083-P00001).
- Bengio Y, Grandvalet Y (2004) No unbiased estimator of the variance of k-fold cross-validation. J Mach Learn Res 5:1089–1105Google Scholar
- Das HS, Jung H, Ebersole B, Wamsley T, Whalin RW (2010) An efficient storm surge forecasting tool for coastal Mississippi. Paper presented at the 32nd international coastal engineering conference, Shanghai, ChinaGoogle Scholar
- Hartigan JA, Wong MA (1979) Algorithm AS 136: a K-means clustering algorithm. J Roy Stat Soc Ser C (Appl Stat) 28(1):100–108Google Scholar
- Kohavi R (1995) A study of cross-validation and bootstrap for accuracy estimation and model selection. In: International joint conference on artificial intelligence, pp 1137–1145Google Scholar
- Lophaven SN, Nielsen HB, Sondergaard J (2002) DACE-A MATLAB Kriging toolbox. Technical University of DenmarkGoogle Scholar
- Luettich RA, Jr., Westerink JJ, Scheffner NW (1992) ADCIRC: an advanced three-dimensional circulation model for shelves, coasts, and estuaries. Report 1. Theory and methodology of ADCIRC-2DDI and ADCIRC-3DL. Dredging Research Program Technical Report DRP-92-6, U.S Army Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MSGoogle Scholar
- Nadal-Caraballo NC, Melby JA, Gonzalez VM, Cox AT (2015) North Atlantic coast comprehensive study—coastal storm hazards from Virginia to Maine, ERDC/CHL TR-15-5. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, VicksburgGoogle Scholar
- Rao RB, Fung G, Rosales R (2008) On the dangers of cross-validation. An experimental evaluation. In: Proceedings of the 2008 SIAM international conference on data mining. SIAM, pp 588–596Google Scholar
- Resio DT, Boc SJ, Borgman L, Cardone V, Cox A, Dally WR, Dean RG, Divoky D, Hirsh E, Irish JL, Levinson D, Niedoroda A, Powell MD, Ratcliff JJ, Stutts V, Suhada J, Toro GR, Vickery PJ (2007) White paper on estimating hurricane inundation probabilities. Consulting Report prepared by USACE for FEMAGoogle Scholar
- Santner TJ, Williams BJ, Notz WI (2013) The design and analysis of computer experiments. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
- Smith JM, Sherlock AR, Resio DT (2001) STWAVE: Steady-state spectral wave model user’s manual for STWAVE, Version 3.0. DTIC DocumentGoogle Scholar
- Smith JM, Westerink JJ, Kennedy AB, Taflanidis AA, Smith TD (2011) SWIMS Hawaii hurricane wave, surge, and runup inundation fast forecasting tool. In: 2011 Solutions to coastal disasters conference, Anchorage, Alaska, 26–29 JuneGoogle Scholar
- USACE (2015) North Atlantic coast comprehensive study: resilient adaption to increasing risk. US Army Corps of Engineers, WashingtonGoogle Scholar