USGS Science⌕ Search

Geology topics

C. S. Barks

Publications and source records attributed to C. S. Barks.

4 recordsLinked to original sources
USGS2007

Region of influence regression for estimating the 50-year flood at ungaged sites

Five methods of developing regional regression models to estimate flood characteristics at ungaged sites in Arkansas are examined. The methods differ in the manner in which the State is divided into subregions. Each successive method (A to E) is computationally more complex than the previous method. Method A makes no subdivision. Methods B and C define two and four geographic subregions, respectively. Method D uses cluster/discriminant analysis to define subregions on the basis of similarities in watershed characteristics. Method E, the new region of influence method, defines a unique subregion for each ungaged site. Split-sample results indicate that, in terms of root-mean-square error, method E (38 percent error) is best. Methods C and D (42 and 41 percent error) were in a virtual tie for second, and methods B (44 percent error) and A (49 percent error) were fourth and fifth best.

Journal of the American Water Resources Associatio↗
USGS1996

Adjustment of regional regression equations for urban storm-runoff quality using at-site data

Regional regression equations have been developed to estimate urban storm-runoff loads and mean concentrations using a national data base. Four statistical methods using at-site data to adjust the regional equation predictions were developed to provide better local estimates. The four adjustment procedures are a single-factor adjustment, a regression of the observed data against the predicted values, a regression of the observed values against the predicted values and additional local independent variables, and a weighted combination of a local regression with the regional prediction. Data collected at five representative storm-runoff sites during 22 storms in Little Rock, Arkansas, were used to verify, and, when appropriate, adjust the regional regression equation predictions. Comparison of observed values of stormrunoff loads and mean concentrations to the predicted values from the regional regression equations for nine constituents (chemical oxygen demand, suspended solids, total nitrogen as N, total ammonia plus organic nitrogen as N, total phosphorus as P, dissolved phosphorus as P, total recoverable copper, total recoverable lead, and total recoverable zinc) showed large prediction errors ranging from 63 percent to more than several thousand percent. Prediction errors for 6 of the 18 regional regression equations were less than 100 percent and could be considered reasonable for water-quality prediction equations. The regression adjustment procedure was used to adjust five of the regional equation predictions to improve the predictive accuracy. For seven of the regional equations the observed and the predicted values are not significantly correlated. Thus neither the unadjusted regional equations nor any of the adjustments were appropriate. The mean of the observed values was used as a simple estimator when the regional equation predictions and adjusted predictions were not appropriate.

Arkansas↗
USGS1995

Verification and adjustment of regional regression models for urban storm-runoff quality using data collected in Little Rock, Arkansas

Storm-runoff water-quality data were used to verify and, when appropriate, adjust regional regression models previously developed to estimate urban storm- runoff loads and mean concentrations in Little Rock, Arkansas. Data collected at 5 representative sites during 22 storms from June 1992 through January 1994 compose the Little Rock data base. Comparison of observed values (0) of storm-runoff loads and mean concentrations to the predicted values (Pu) from the regional regression models for nine constituents (chemical oxygen demand, suspended solids, total nitrogen, total ammonia plus organic nitrogen as nitrogen, total phosphorus, dissolved phosphorus, total recoverable copper, total recoverable lead, and total recoverable zinc) shows large prediction errors ranging from 63 to several thousand percent. Prediction errors for six of the regional regression models are less than 100 percent, and can be considered reasonable for water-quality models. Differences between 0 and Pu are due to variability in the Little Rock data base and error in the regional models. Where applicable, a model adjustment procedure (termed MAP-R-P) based upon regression with 0 against Pu was applied to improve predictive accuracy. For 11 of the 18 regional water-quality models, 0 and Pu are significantly correlated, that is much of the variation in 0 is explained by the regional models. Five of these 11 regional models consistently overestimate O; therefore, MAP-R-P can be used to provide a better estimate. For the remaining seven regional models, 0 and Pu are not significanfly correlated, thus neither the unadjusted regional models nor the MAP-R-P is appropriate. A simple estimator, such as the mean of the observed values may be used if the regression models are not appropriate. Standard error of estimate of the adjusted models ranges from 48 to 130 percent. Calibration results may be biased due to the limited data set sizes in the Little Rock data base. The relatively large values of standard error of estimate for some of the constituent models may be unacceptable for some applications. The user may need to collect additional local data for these constituents and repeat the model adjustment procedure analysis or calibrate an independent local regression model.

Water-Resources Investigations Report↗