Refine
Language
- English (14) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (14)
Keywords
- validation (14) (remove)
Bumps in river profiles
(2017)
The analysis of longitudinal river profiles is an important tool for studying landscape evolution. However, characterizing river profiles based on digital elevation models (DEMs) suffers from errors and artifacts that particularly prevail along valley bottoms. The aim of this study is to characterize uncertainties that arise from the analysis of river profiles derived from different, near-globally available DEMs. We devised new algorithms quantile carving and the CRS algorithm - that rely on quantile regression to enable hydrological correction and the uncertainty quantification of river profiles. We find that globally available DEMs commonly overestimate river elevations in steep topography. The distributions of elevation errors become increasingly wider and right skewed if adjacent hillslope gradients are steep. Our analysis indicates that the AW3D DEM has the highest precision and lowest bias for the analysis of river profiles in mountainous topography. The new 12m resolution TanDEM-X DEM has a very low precision, most likely due to the combined effect of steep valley walls and the presence of water surfaces in valley bottoms. Compared to the conventional approaches of carving and filling, we find that our new approach is able to reduce the elevation bias and errors in longitudinal river profiles.
Flood loss modeling is an important component for risk analyses and decision support in flood risk management. Commonly, flood loss models describe complex damaging processes by simple, deterministic approaches like depth-damage functions and are associated with large uncertainty. To improve flood loss estimation and to provide quantitative information about the uncertainty associated with loss modeling, a probabilistic, multivariable Bagging decision Tree Flood Loss Estimation MOdel (BT-FLEMO) for residential buildings was developed. The application of BT-FLEMO provides a probability distribution of estimated losses to residential buildings per municipality. BT-FLEMO was applied and validated at the mesoscale in 19 municipalities that were affected during the 2002 flood by the River Mulde in Saxony, Germany. Validation was undertaken on the one hand via a comparison with six deterministic loss models, including both depth-damage functions and multivariable models. On the other hand, the results were compared with official loss data. BT-FLEMO outperforms deterministic, univariable, and multivariable models with regard to model accuracy, although the prediction uncertainty remains high. An important advantage of BT-FLEMO is the quantification of prediction uncertainty. The probability distribution of loss estimates by BT-FLEMO well represents the variation range of loss estimates of the other models in the case study.
Learning to regulate anger is an important task in childhood development, as maladaptive anger regulation has been linked to a variety of problems, including aggression and social rejection. To assess anger regulation in situ, in a previous study we developed a behavioural observation measure and demonstrated its cross-sectional construct and criterion validity in a sample of 599 children with a mean age of 8.1years. The present study further validated the measure by demonstrating its predictive validity. About 10months after the behavioural observation, participants were asked to imagine two anger-eliciting situations and report what they would do to get rid of their anger. Observed anger regulation strategies at T1 correlated significantly with self-reported regulatory behaviour at T2, suggesting that the behavioural observation measure is an ecologically valid approach for assessing anger regulation in middle childhood.
Within the field of species distribution modelling an apparent dichotomy exists between process-based and correlative approaches, where the processes are explicit in the former and implicit in the latter. However, these intuitive distinctions can become blurred when comparing species distribution modelling approaches in more detail. In this review article, we contrast the extremes of the correlativeprocess spectrum of species distribution models with respect to core assumptions, model building and selection strategies, validation, uncertainties, common errors and the questions they are most suited to answer. The extremes of such approaches differ clearly in many aspects, such as model building approaches, parameter estimation strategies and transferability. However, they also share strengths and weaknesses. We show that claims of one approach being intrinsically superior to the other are misguided and that they ignore the processcorrelation continuum as well as the domains of questions that each approach is addressing. Nonetheless, the application of process-based approaches to species distribution modelling lags far behind more correlative (process-implicit) methods and more research is required to explore their potential benefits. Critical issues for the employment of species distribution modelling approaches are given, together with a guideline for appropriate usage. We close with challenges for future development of process-explicit species distribution models and how they may complement current approaches to study species distributions.