| Abstract: | ABSTRACT: Considerable effort is expended each year in making flood peak estimates at both gaged and ungaged sites. Many methods, both simplistic and complex, have been proposed for making such estimates. The hydrologist that must make an estimate at a particular site is interested in the accuracy of the estimate. Most methods are developed using either statistical analyses or analytical optimization schemes. While publications describing these methods often include some statistical measure of goodness-of-flt, the terminology often does not provide the potential user with an answer to the question,‘How accurate is the estimate?’ That is, statistical terminology often are not used properly, which may lead to a false sense of security. The use of the correct terminology will help potential users evaluate the usefulness of a proposed method and provide a means of comparing different methods. This study provides definitions for terms often used in literature on flood peak estimation and provides an interpretation for these terms. Specific problems discussed include the use of arbitrary levels of significance in statistical tests of hypotheses, the identification of both random and systematic variation in estimates from hydrologic methods, and the difference between accuracy of model calibration and accuracy of prediction. |
