Sentences with phrase «bias adjustments for»

Uncertainties should decrease closer to near - current dates (e.g. from denser and more accurate sampling)-- but note that these products also employ different QC and analysis methods, rely to varying degrees on satellite data, on sea - ice data to constrain polar SST, and on bias adjustments for historical changes in measurement methods.

-LSB-...] 42 and 49 — UAH satellite temperature PRIOR to the bias adjustment for satellite drift!

Not exact matches

A propensity score adjustment was added to correct for biases inherent in Internet panels.

Finally, NIS is a landline telephone survey; although statistical adjustments adequately compensate for noncoverage of households without landline telephones, some nonresponse and noncoverage bias might remain (10).

Gorey KM, Leslie DR: The prevalence of child sexual abuse: Integrative review adjustment for potential response and measurement biases.

To correct for limitations, Bauchner et al suggested four standards for breast feeding studies.22 These include avoidance of detection bias, clear definition of the outcome event, clear definition of breast feeding, and adjustment for potential confounding variables.

This simple adjustment in the scoring criterion removes all bias in favor of consensus: Truthful answers maximize expected score even for respondents who believe that their answer represents a minority view.

Results avoid bias from within - country selection and are robust to continental fixed effects and to controlling for non-performance-based forms of teacher salary adjustments.

Characteristics influenced by the school the students are attending will bias estimates if they are included in statistical adjustments for student background.

The problem, she said in a separate analysis, is that Ms. Raymond compared the achievement of individual charter students with that of groups of students from nearby public schools, without making the statistical adjustments necessary to account for the natural downward biases that result from that sort of calculation.

No statistical adjustments were needed to correct for bias, so a comparison between classrooms within the same school can be regarded as a comparison of «true value - added».

I did make some adjustments on the brake bias and the traction control for the wet conditions.

[Response: Most of the adjustments you mention are for Time of Observation and station move biases and presumably you are not suggesting that known problems not be corrected?

There are many adjustments made to the raw data to account for biases and other factors.

When a sample of highly urbanized stations was tested, the adjustments successfully removed warming bias for the 1895 - 1980 period, but left the 1980s - 2000s period effectively unadjusted.

The vast majority of their adjustments involved correcting for «urban cooling», whereas urbanization bias is predominantly a warming bias.

The net effect of their adjustments on their global temperature estimates was unrealistically low, particularly for recent decades, when urbanization bias is expected to have increased.

Nelson et al took a closer look at the Indiana data and made adjustments to correct for any biases.

Note in Watts Figure 16, by far the largest adjustments (in the warming direction) are for rural stations, which is to be expected if TOB is introducing a cool bias at those stations, as Karl discusses.

Menne et al., 2010 suggested that the National Climatic Data Center's step - change adjustments had already accounted for any biases which poor siting may have introduced.

In our Urbanization bias III paper, we show that their adjustments are seriously inappropriate for dealing with urbanization bias, and actually end up spreading the urbanization bias into the rural station records!

We also find that the adjustments are inappropriate for dealing with siting biases.

«[NASA is] supposed to make a «homogenisation adjustment,» to allow for [urban heat island (UHI)-RSB- bias,» Homewood wrote.

Monthly analyses of rain - gauge data, including from GPCC, are used in addition to satellite data over land, though with adjustments for the biases of the rain - gauge measurements.

The homogenization adjustments developed by the National Climatic Data Center to reduce the extent of non-climatic biases in the networks were found to be inadequate, inappropriate and problematic for urbanization bias.

If the adjustment incorporated by Kennedy et al is correct then the discrepancy is at least partly accounted for by bias in the temperature record rather than a problem with the models.

While the various studies have identified possible sources of bias, the lack of documentary evidence for the changes and the degree of speculation concerning the geographical extent, duration and timing of the changes makes the adjustments no less ad hoc than the simple adjustment.

It was the fact that the multitude of adjustments for supposed biases just happened to generate a correction that was very close in form to the long term variation in the signal.

In addition, he is correcting the data for urban heat bias by the so - called population density adjustment.

Since we have seen so many agencies get onto the AGW bandwagon at any cost, is it unreasonable to ask for unfiltered raw ARGO and satellite data prior to the potentially biased gate keepers «adjustments»?

It is a great education piece, a «bedrock» foundation paper for instrument siting, temperature sensing, temperature trend analyses, and the errors (willful or otherwise) induced by human biased «temperature adjustments» to the data sets.

The fact that these adjustments need to be made for the entire record at the same time, rather than for individual instruments as with the surface record, means there are no nearby stations without the adjustments which allow comparisons to check for biases introduced by the adjustment.

There is a potential for bias in these matters from those looking for and making adjustments to look harder for those in the direction that might favor their own views on AGW in this case.

The uncertainty in method bias for any of these adjustment algorithms has to be estimated differently and is possible, I think, with proper benchmark testing, as I noted previously, where at least we can determine the limitations of these approaches..

Note regarding homogeneity: Unlike some data sets produced by others, this data product does not include any adjustments to «correct» for apparent inhomogenieties or other discontinuities and biases in the data.

I see the fact that the mean and stdev of the adjustments to the USHCN station as quite similar to the mean and stdev of the «ground truth» adjustments based on the USCRN station as evidence that they are doing a reasonable job of correcting for tobs - associated biases in the mean.

Apart from being important for comparison between model simulations and observations, the bias adjustment can calibrate the uncertainty, enhance prediction skill and become a key concept for communication purposes.

While the impact of adjustments that correct for these biases are relatively small globally (and actually reduce the century - scale warming trend once oceans are included) there are certain regions where the impact of adjustments on temperature trends are large.

Nope jbenton2013, you are missing the point, if the «adjustment» is related to TOBS even though there is no need to adjust for TOBS, then what might be instrumentation bias, siting bias, or other impact are wrapped up into one.

In particular, he explained the bias dependency on the lead time, also known as drift, and distinguished between two approaches for bias adjustment (and not bias correction): a non-parametric, consisting in adjusting each forecast time separately, and a parametric approach, where a function to adjust different forecast times at once is used.

Over the conterminous USA, after adjustment for time - of - observation bias and other changes, rural station trends were almost indistinguishable from series including urban sites (Peterson, 2003; Figure 3.3, and similar considerations apply to China from 1951 to 2001 (Li et al., 2004).

However, no adjustments have been made for heterogeneous and other biasing events.

The publicly available abstract makes the point that the dominant effect was the choice of method for making adjustments (correcting biases) to the data.

A propensity score adjustment was added to correct for biases inherent in Internet panels.

• Interpersonal processes in marital relationship compatibility • Self - presentation in clinical and forensic psychology • Biases in self and other perception • Methodology in forensic mental health assessment • Assessment of inter-parental conflict (IPC) and children's adjustment to divorce • Development of a quick screening measure for martial compatibility • Development of a self and other rating scale for parenting knowledge

Concerns that may be relevant for this study included a possible bias in reporting or interpretation of somatic symptoms and limited sensitivity to detecting mild adjustment problems.

Some researchers have argued that associations between abuse and adjustment problems can be explained by reporting biases because many studies of the effects of physical maltreatment use samples for which maltreatment is identified by referral to social service agencies.6 Of the community - wide population of maltreated children, those who are referred may represent a biased, more problematic subgroup.

Then, weighting adjustments are frequently used to reduce the potential for biases that may be present due to incomplete frame coverage and survey nonresponse — both inherent in all telephone surveys.