Sentences with phrase «in calibration»

Hard - working Machinist Apprentice who is extremely knowledgeable in calibration methods and safety procedures.

Bullets, then Cannonballs: In the book, Collins describes this concept as a lesson in calibration.

Each monitor is calibrated for an hour at the factory, while a separate sensor can be purchased for in - home adjustments using its built - in calibration engine for precise color.

If going through this process has you wondering how much more could be done to refine the picture, then it may be worth the small investment in a calibration disc.

Most often, when someone is colour grading in DCI - P3, they're targeting high - end digital movie projectors, not other computer screens — not to mention the fact that actual professionals who need to work in DCI - P3 are buying monitors with built - in calibration tools that cost several times more than the Surface Pro.

Lawyer Kyla Lee recognized an inconsistency in the calibration record provided when compared with other calibration records obtained in other cases.

So, we have some that correlate during a specified period, some that don't, and then some that do correlate in the calibration period but then «diverge» (by differing degrees) later on.

Although the existence of an upside down quadratic response to temperature has been known for a long time (e.g., Fritts 1976), current tree ring - based reconstructions universally assume that a linear approximation is not problematic, which is equivalent to the assumption that past climates do not deviate far from those in the calibration period, as will be shown.

Suppose that in a period other than the calibration period, the proxy and the temperature are related on average by the red line, that is, a different linear relationship from the one in the calibration period.

It seems that there is a great deal of uncertainty in calibration of the XBT measurements during the 1970's and 1980's.

The need for hyperspectral observations from geostationary satellites was also addressed, including a discussion of their potential role in calibration of the space - based observing system (within those spectral ranges); monitoring of the diurnal cycle; and provision of spectrally resolved radiances (hyperspectral visible / near - IR and IR) as a climate reference.

These are often calculated from the error apparent in the calibration of the proxies.

Hence, they are likely to be minimum uncertainties, as they do not take into account other sources of error not apparent in the calibration period, such as any reduction in the statistical robustness of the proxy series in earlier times (Briffa and Osborn, 1999; Esper et al., 2002; Bradley et al., 2003b; Osborn and Briffa, 2006).

If the regression equation is then used to reconstruct temperatures for another period during which the proxies are statistically similar to those in the calibration period, it would be expected to capture a similar fraction of the variance.

And even with the smoothed curve correlation, it only appears to be a strong correlation in the calibration period.

Figure: The upper panel shows the how the MBH methodology matches the trends and variability in the calibration period (the unshaded area).

One technique to demonstrate credibility is by assessing how well the statistical model does on data that was not used in the calibration.

If there is an important cause of variability in the model that is not operating in the calibration / verification period, then that could cause problems.

If the result is an unsatisfactory representation of temperature in the calibration period, then either the ex-ate criteria are incorrect OR you can not reconstruct temperatures from tree rings.

If the proxy's response correlates oppositely to the physical theory in the calibration period, then it should not be inverted.

There is nothing in his code that flips a proxy based on which way would pass testing in the calibration period.

I think it is also clear that the way he handled the sediment proxy in the calibration period was not consistent with the a priori relationship expected by Tijlander.

And when you mix in the calibration versus global temp vice local, get another concern for series with less strong physical rationales.

The issue isn't per se in the calibration being done improperly mathematically (or maybe it is, but that's not what we're discussing) but just that the papers related to the samples say that they are inappriate to validate.

The information needed is in the calibration data, which are not published.

The high frequency texture of a reconstruction is enhanced by a steep temperature trend in the calibration process.

These techniques have been useful in the calibration of the experiment and in the investigation of phase randomization.

In the calibration step, the temperatures have to be correct.

In Mann 2008, there were similar 100 % recons in the calibration period.

The selection of a single reconstruction of the ALL temperature series is clearly somewhat arbitrary... The method that produces the best fit in the calibration period is principal component regression...

The movement of PC1 in the calibration period to PC4 in calibration + validation steps is likely due to the fact that it corresponds to the elevated trend in global temperatures being the most significant pattern in the 20th century greatly reduced by inclusion of earlier temporal variance that doesn't have this positive trend.

Those PCs were then used along with other (sparser) proxy series in calibration against the instrumental temperature PCs, as you say.

The reason given in Briffa 2001 for their selection of a certain reconstruction is discussed: >> > The selection of a single reconstruction of the ALL temperature series is clearly somewhat arbitrary... The method that produces the best fit in the calibration period is principal component regression... << >> ``... we note that the 1450s were much cooler in all of the other (i.e., not PCA regression) methods of producing this curve...» << <

That to me pretty evidently shows that the reason they chose the PCA was because it provided the best fit in the calibration period.

The latter is a value assumed by the laboratory and then accounted for in the calibration curve.

There is an error in that original reading, and in the calibration curve.

If 14C prior is uniform, that implies that there was almost no plant growth, lake sedimentation, or human activity during flat spots in the calibration curve such as 400 - 750 BC or 200 - 350BC in your illustration.

It is telling us that radiocarbon dating is blind in this region, due to the plateau in the calibration curve.

Some of the results of this ratio were entirely perverse - it was possible for a run that had scored a reasonably good RE in the calibration (there was a good correlation between it and the actual temperatures) to be thrown out of the final assessment on the grounds that it had done very well in the verification - the correlation with actual temperatures was considered too good!

It may be an issue in calibration of course...

Following MM05a, the first PCs of this process were then used as regressors in a calibration with the Northern Hemisphere mean from the MBH verification data grid and the RE of verification determined, for each Monte Carlo iteration.

Mannian PC methodology divides each series by its standard deviation in the calibration period.

This calculation is closely related to the RE statistic in proxy reconstructions, where the base case is the mean temperature in the calibration period.

Archaeologists and other scientists, who are more interested in the radiocarbon dating tool per se, quantify the MRE in their study region and apply the correction in the calibration of marine radiocarbon ages from that particular place.

According to the NAS North report cited by Fred above in # 60, «in the calibration period, RE, CE and r ^ 2 are all equal.»

In other words, this Tex86 proxy (which is being used very extensively in the warming alarmist literature now and is showing more warming in the past for example as a result of small changes in CO2), needs a lot more work in calibration and is probably mis - calibrated.

Where they leave the flavor discussion and get into the «range of variability» in the calibration versus the extrapolation areas.

If (1) you have a few hockey stick shaped series in a smallish data set which otherwise is cancelling noise, and (2) then re-scale your average to a temperature scale in the calibration period, you can get hockey stick shaped «reconstructions».

Nichol: we don't use satellite data in our calibration.

In such cases, validation experiments are done (and described in detail in the paper), wherein one part of the record (e.g. the earlier part) is used to calibrate the proxy data, and a reconstruction is independently performed over the other part of the record (e.g. the late part), where it can be directly compared against the part of the instrumental record not used in the calibration process.