Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Believe it or not?

Research

Associated organisational units

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Believe it or not?: the challenge of validating large scale probabilistic risk models

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review

Published

Standard

Believe it or not? the challenge of validating large scale probabilistic risk models. / Sayers, Paul; Lamb, Rob; Panzeri, Mike et al.
In: E3S Web of Conferences, Vol. 7, 11004, 20.10.2016.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review

Harvard

Sayers, P, Lamb, R, Panzeri, M, Bowman, H, Hall, J, Horritt, M & Penning-Rowsell, E 2016, 'Believe it or not? the challenge of validating large scale probabilistic risk models', E3S Web of Conferences, vol. 7, 11004. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/20160711004

APA

Sayers, P., Lamb, R., Panzeri, M., Bowman, H., Hall, J., Horritt, M., & Penning-Rowsell, E. (2016). Believe it or not? the challenge of validating large scale probabilistic risk models. E3S Web of Conferences, 7, Article 11004. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/20160711004

Vancouver

Sayers P, Lamb R, Panzeri M, Bowman H, Hall J, Horritt M et al. Believe it or not? the challenge of validating large scale probabilistic risk models. E3S Web of Conferences. 2016 Oct 20;7:11004. doi: 10.1051/e3sconf/20160711004

Author

Sayers, Paul ; Lamb, Rob ; Panzeri, Mike et al. / Believe it or not? the challenge of validating large scale probabilistic risk models. In: E3S Web of Conferences. 2016 ; Vol. 7.

Bibtex

@article{54682c6e8b6e42c592c917061945d6b4,
title = "Believe it or not?: the challenge of validating large scale probabilistic risk models",
abstract = "The National Flood Risk Assessment (NaFRA) for England and Wales was initially undertaken in 2002 with frequent updates since. NaFRA has become a key source of information on flood risk, informing policy and investment decisions as well as communicating risk to the public and insurers. To make well informed decisions based on these data, users rightfully demand to know the confidence they can place in them. The probability of inundation and associated damage however cannot be validated in the traditional sense, due the rare and random nature of damaging floods and the lack of a long (and widespread) stationary observational record (reflecting not only changes in climate but also the significant changes in land use and flood defence infrastructure that are likely to have occurred). To explore the validity of NaFRA this paper therefore provides a bottom-up qualitative exploration of the potential errors within the supporting methods and data. The paper concludes by underlining the need for further research to understand how to robustly validate probabilistic risk models.",
author = "Paul Sayers and Rob Lamb and Mike Panzeri and Hayley Bowman and Jim Hall and Matt Horritt and Edmund Penning-Rowsell",
year = "2016",
month = oct,
day = "20",
doi = "10.1051/e3sconf/20160711004",
language = "English",
volume = "7",
journal = "E3S Web of Conferences",
issn = "2267-1242",
publisher = "EDP Sciences",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Believe it or not?

T2 - the challenge of validating large scale probabilistic risk models

AU - Sayers, Paul

AU - Lamb, Rob

AU - Panzeri, Mike

AU - Bowman, Hayley

AU - Hall, Jim

AU - Horritt, Matt

AU - Penning-Rowsell, Edmund

PY - 2016/10/20

Y1 - 2016/10/20

N2 - The National Flood Risk Assessment (NaFRA) for England and Wales was initially undertaken in 2002 with frequent updates since. NaFRA has become a key source of information on flood risk, informing policy and investment decisions as well as communicating risk to the public and insurers. To make well informed decisions based on these data, users rightfully demand to know the confidence they can place in them. The probability of inundation and associated damage however cannot be validated in the traditional sense, due the rare and random nature of damaging floods and the lack of a long (and widespread) stationary observational record (reflecting not only changes in climate but also the significant changes in land use and flood defence infrastructure that are likely to have occurred). To explore the validity of NaFRA this paper therefore provides a bottom-up qualitative exploration of the potential errors within the supporting methods and data. The paper concludes by underlining the need for further research to understand how to robustly validate probabilistic risk models.

AB - The National Flood Risk Assessment (NaFRA) for England and Wales was initially undertaken in 2002 with frequent updates since. NaFRA has become a key source of information on flood risk, informing policy and investment decisions as well as communicating risk to the public and insurers. To make well informed decisions based on these data, users rightfully demand to know the confidence they can place in them. The probability of inundation and associated damage however cannot be validated in the traditional sense, due the rare and random nature of damaging floods and the lack of a long (and widespread) stationary observational record (reflecting not only changes in climate but also the significant changes in land use and flood defence infrastructure that are likely to have occurred). To explore the validity of NaFRA this paper therefore provides a bottom-up qualitative exploration of the potential errors within the supporting methods and data. The paper concludes by underlining the need for further research to understand how to robustly validate probabilistic risk models.

U2 - 10.1051/e3sconf/20160711004

DO - 10.1051/e3sconf/20160711004

M3 - Journal article

VL - 7

JO - E3S Web of Conferences

JF - E3S Web of Conferences

SN - 2267-1242

M1 - 11004

ER -