ÌÇÐÄÊÓÆµ

More Website Templates @ TemplateMonster.com - September08, 2014!

Changing Extremes

21st February 2016

The MRes students of STOR-i are currently in the middle of our short research topic projects. These involve writing a literature review into one of the topics presented to us a few weeks ago. Some of these were discussed in Optimising with Ants and Ice-cream Cones, Can Hamiltonian Win At Monte Carlo? and Gaussian Processes. The topic I have chosen to look at in more detail is an extension of the subject of Tails, Droughts and Extremes, that is Non-stationary Extremes. This was presented by to ozone data, where the location parameter of a GEV was assumed to follow a DLM. They showed that this approach is that any trend, whether short or long term, can be picked out without assuming a parametric form, making it very flexible. However, there are many parameters to estimate which may involve a lot of computational time.

Varying Extreme Parameters with Covariates

This is by far the most common method I have come across, and there are multiple ways of going about it. Unlike the DLM approach, it is more common to use a GP distribution, in which case the choice of $u$ is key. One way is to split the data into predefined "seasons" that are assumed approximately stationary and then select $u$ such that the exceedance probability, $p$, is constant. If there are more covariates involved than just time, one could allow $u$ to vary with the covariates. This was used by suggest a Box-Cox method of the form $$\frac{Y_t^{\lambda_t}-1}{\lambda_t} = \mu_t + \sigma_tZ_t.$$ Once $Z_t$ has been obtained, the extremes of $Z_t$ can be analysed in a more straight forward manner. The benefits of this approach are that the non-stationary behaviour can be estimated much more reliably than in the previous methods. In addition, it has more statistical efficiency. On the down side, if the extremes of $Y_t$ do not follow the same non-stationarity as the body, then $Z_t$ will require another non-stationary method. The other negative is that it is much more complicated than the methods above.

All of these methods are interesting, and have been very interesting to read about. There does seem to be a lot of disagreement as to which method is best, but I imagine that it is which method is the best depends very much on the situation and application.

References

[1] Chavez-Demoulin V., Davison A. C., REVSTAT – Statistical Journal, Volume 10, Number 1, pp.109–133 (2012).
[2] Gabriel Huerta, Bruno Sanso, Environ Ecol Stat, 14, pp.285–299 (2007).
[3] P. J. Northrop and P. Jonathan, Environmetrics, Vol.22(7), pp.799-809 (2011).
[4] -->
Website designed by