K. E. Trenberth, J. T. Fasullo, and T. G. Shepherd, Nature Clim. Change, vol.5, p.725, 2015.

T. G. Shepherd, Current Climate Change Reports, vol.2, p.28, 2016.

T. G. Shepherd, Nature Geoscience, vol.7, p.703, 2014.

C. B. Field, V. Barros, T. F. Stocker, and Q. Dahe, Managing the risks of extreme events and 185 disasters to advance climate change adaptation: special report of the intergovernmental 186 panel on climate change, 2012.

J. Sillmann, Weather and climate extremes, vol.18, p.65, 2017.

E. N. Lorenz, Journal of the atmospheric sciences, vol.20, p.130, 1963.

V. Lucarini, K. Fraedrich, and F. Lunkeit, , 2009.

S. Vannitsem and P. Ekelmans, Earth System Dynamics, vol.9, p.1063, 2018.

J. A. Francis and S. J. Vavrus, Geophysical Research Letters, vol.39, p.1, 2012.

E. A. Barnes, Geophysical Research Letters, vol.40, p.4734, 2013.

D. E. Horton, C. B. Skinner, D. Singh, and N. S. Diffenbaugh, Nature climate change, vol.4, p.194, 2014.

M. Unka?evi? and I. To?i?, Theoretical and applied climatology, vol.120, p.29, 2015.

.. A. Menzel, H. Seifert, and N. Estrella, International journal of biometeorology, vol.55, p.921, 2011.

I. Janekovi?, H. Mihanovi?, I. Vilibi?, and M. Tudor, Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, vol.177, p.3200, 2014.

D. Lecomte, Weatherwise, vol.67, p.20, 2014.

J. A. Luque-espinar, R. M. Mateos, I. García-moreno, E. Pardo-igúzquiza, G. Herrera et al., France -Thousands Evacuated After River Levels Hit 100 Year High FloodList, p.183, 2016.

R. Davies, France Floods -1 More Dead, Levels of the Seine Rise in, Paris FloodList, vol.185, 2016.

S. Philip, Journal of Hydrometeorology, vol.19, p.1881, 2018.

R. Davies, France -Record Rain Causes Floods and Landslides in Paris and North Flood-188

. List, , 2018.

R. Davies, France -Deadly Floods in South West After 244mm of Rain in 6 Hours Flood-190

. List, , 2018.

A. Menzel, Meteorologische Zeitschrift, vol.14, p.75, 2005.

P. A. Stott, D. A. Stone, and M. R. Allen, Nature, vol.432, p.610, 2004.

M. Beniston, Geophys. Res. Lett, p.31, 2004.

J. Cattiaux and A. Ribes, Bull. Amer. Meteorol. Soc, 2018.

M. Stéfanon, P. Drobinski, F. Andrea, and N. D. Noblet-ducoudré, Journal of Geophysical, vol.117, p.1, 2012.

E. M. Fischer, S. I. Seneviratne, P. L. Vidale, D. Lüthi, and C. Schär, Journal of Climate, vol.20, p.5081, 2007.

A. Jézéquel, Environmental Research Letters, vol.13, p.54007, 2018.

D. Barriopedro, E. M. Fischer, J. Luterbacher, R. M. Trigo, and R. Garcia-herrera, Science, vol.332, p.220, 2011.

S. Russo, J. Sillmann, and E. M. Fischer, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United 204 States of America, vol.10, p.17905, 2011.

.. F. Otto, N. Massey, G. J. Van-oldenborgh, R. G. Jones, and M. R. Allen, Geophys. Res

. Lett, , p.4702, 2012.

M. Hauser, R. Orth, and S. I. Seneviratne, Geophys. Res. Lett, vol.43, p.2819, 2016.

A. Jézéquel, Climatic Change, 2018.

S. F. Kew, Bull. Amer. Meteorol. Soc, vol.100, p.49, 2019.

E. Kalnay, Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, vol.77, p.437, 1996.

K. E. Taylor, R. J. Stouffer, and G. A. Meehl, Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, vol.212, p.485, 2012.

P. Michelangeli, M. Vrac, and H. Loukos, Geophys. Res. Lett, vol.36, p.11708, 2009.

E. Kalnay, Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, vol.77, issue.3, p.437, 1996.

H. Panofsky and G. Brier, Some applications of statistics to meteorology, 1958.

Z. Haddad, D. Rosenfeld, and Q. J. , Meteorol. Soc, vol.123, p.1283, 1997.

M. Déqué and G. Planet, Change, vol.57, p.16, 2007.

M. Vrac, Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, vol.12, p.2769, 2012.

P. Oettli, B. Sultan, C. Baron, and M. Vrac, Environ. Res. Lett, vol.6, 2011.

M. Troin, Climate Dynamics, vol.46, 2015.

S. J. Defrance, D. , and J. Vanderlinden, 223 Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol.224, p.6533, 2017.

, Earth System Dynamics, vol.9, p.313, 2018.

D. Faranda, G. Messori, and P. Yiou, Scientific reports, vol.7, p.41278, 2017.

.. A. Freitas, J. M. Freitas, and M. Todd, Probability Theory and Related Fields, vol.147, p.228, 2010.

V. Lucarini, D. Faranda, and J. Wouters, Journal of statistical physics, vol.147, p.63, 2012.

L. S. Liebovitch and T. Toth, physics Letters A, vol.141, p.386, 1989.

.. N. Sarkar and B. B. Chaudhuri, IEEE Transactions on systems, man, and cybernetics, vol.24, p.232, 1994.

M. Süveges, Extremes, vol.10, p.41, 2007.

V. Lucarini, Extremes and recurrence in dynamical systems, 2016.
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01258387

, Geopotential height Z500 anomalies (in meters) computed subtracting the monthly average from the average Z500 field of the event. d,e,f) Relative changes in predictability persistence and analogs quality for the RCP 4.5 (blue) and RCP 8.5 (red) scenarios. The percentage indicates the agreement among different models: 0% means that half of the models have different sign of changes. 100% means that all the models have same sign of changes

, Geopotential height Z500 anomalies (in meters) computed subtracting the monthly average from the average Z500 field of the event. d,e,f) Relative changes in predictability persistence and analogs quality for the RCP 4.5 (blue) and RCP 8.5 (red) scenarios. The percentage indicates the agreement among different models: 0% means that half of the models have different sign of changes. 100% means that all the models have same sign of changes

, Geopotential height Z500 anomalies (in meters) computed subtracting the monthly average from the average Z500 field of the event. d,e,f) Relative changes in predictability persistence and analogs quality for the RCP 4.5 (blue) and RCP 8.5 (red) scenarios. The percentage indicates the agreement among different models: 0% means that half of the models have different sign of changes. 100% means that all the models have same sign of changes

, Geopotential height Z500 anomalies (in meters) computed subtracting the monthly average from the average Z500 field of the event. d,e,f) Relative changes in predictability persistence and analogs quality for the RCP 4.5 (blue) and RCP 8.5 (red) scenarios. The percentage indicates the agreement among different models: 0% means that half of the models have different sign of changes. 100% means that all the models have same sign of changes

, Supplementary Figure 7: Analysis for the, 2018.

, Geopotential height Z500 anomalies (in meters) computed subtracting the monthly average from the average Z500 field of the event. d,e,f) Relative changes in predictability persistence and analogs quality for the RCP 4.5 (blue) and RCP 8.5 (red) scenarios. The percentage indicates the agreement among different models: 0% means that half of the models have different sign of changes. 100% means that all the models have same sign of changes

, Supplementary Figure 8: Analysis for the Octobrer 2018 flood (FL2018-10-FR)

, Geopotential height Z500 anomalies (in meters) computed subtracting the monthly average from the average Z500 field of the event. d,e,f) Relative changes in predictability persistence and analogs quality for the RCP 4.5 (blue) and RCP 8.5 (red) scenarios. The percentage indicates the agreement among different models: 0% means that half of the models have different sign of changes. 100% means that all the models have same sign of changes

, Geopotential height Z500 anomalies (in meters) computed subtracting the monthly average from the average Z500 field of the event. d,e,f) Relative changes in predictability persistence and analogs quality for the RCP 4.5 (blue) and RCP 8.5 (red) scenarios. The percentage indicates the agreement among different models: 0% means that half of the models have different sign of changes. 100% means that all the models have same sign of changes

, Geopotential height Z500 anomalies (in meters) computed subtracting the monthly average from the average Z500 field of the event. d,e,f) Relative changes in predictability persistence and analogs quality for the RCP 4.5 (blue) and RCP 8.5 (red) scenarios. The percentage indicates the agreement among different models: 0% means that half of the models have different sign of changes. 100% means that all the models have same sign of changes

, Geopotential height Z500 anomalies (in meters) computed subtracting the monthly average from the average Z500 field of the event. d,e,f) Relative changes in predictability persistence and analogs quality for the RCP 4.5 (blue) and RCP 8.5 (red) scenarios. The percentage indicates the agreement among different models: 0% means that half of the models have different sign of changes. 100% means that all the models have same sign of changes

, Geopotential height Z500 anomalies (in meters) computed subtracting the monthly average from the average Z500 field of the event. d,e,f) Relative changes in predictability persistence and analogs quality for the RCP 4.5 (blue) and RCP 8.5 (red) scenarios. The percentage indicates the agreement among different models: 0% means that half of the models have different sign of changes. 100% means that all the models have same sign of changes