Sentences with phrase «error bounds»

Please show me a single analysis of error bounds in climate models.

It is kind of like asking for error bounds on e = mc ^ 2, because after all, new theories may find that this equation is incomplete.

An upper error bound on the longwave adjustment is 1.5 W m - 2 and OLR was therefore increased uniformly by this amount in constructing a «best - estimate».

A FAJ paper in 1998 (I think) came up with approximate error bounds, and proved it useless, but it is still used by some consultants today.

Do I really believe that a $ 15k float, running unattended and uncalibrated in the open ocean will produce temperature data over an expected temperature range of 0 - 30 C with 5 millidegree error bounds over its operational life (4 + / - years)?

All suggesting no statistically significant trend since the «trend» is less than the applicable error bounds of the relevant measuring devices

The time series land based thermometer records are hopeless (not simply because of question adjustments and homogenisation, and instrument error bounds) but also because that throughout the time series the stations used with which the data is being compiled, at any one moment of time, is continually changing, so too their spatial coverage, such that at no time is like with like ever comparable.

For both hemispheres the agreement is generally good and certainly within the published error bounds.

The simulated distribution, using the IPCC RF error bounds, is also shown in the figure at the top of the post (upper plot).

If you ask «how old is the universe» you will get an answer with error bounds due to uncertainty in measuring red shifts and things like that, but it will not (and how could it), include a factor quantifying our confidence in quantum mechanics as a model.

I have been saying much the same thing for some considerable time, that whilst there are uncertainties surrounding our data, particularly time series temperature data sets (which have much wider error bounds than their compilers will acknowledge), the «pause» (or slow down) of the last 20 years has removed any doubt that Climate Sensitivity is much lower than the IPCC would wish to acknowledge.

The discrepancy is well outside the error bounds.

When I ran into it, one of the first things I noticed was that there were no error bounds on the calculations, and that the cofactors were all highly correlated with each other.

Though I haven't talked about it before, this model could be used to provide shorter - run estimates of the market as well — but the error bounds around the shorter estimates would be big enough to make the model useless.

«These new results indicate that relative sea levels in New Zealand have been rising at an average rate of 1.6 mm / yr over the last 100 years — a figure that is not only within the error bounds of the original determination, but when corrected for glacial - isostatic effects has a high level of coherency with other regional and global sea level rise determinations.

So this prediction from 1981 is «falsifiable» even though it doesn't contain any error bounds?