Re # 21: I think one of the issues here is «with an admittedly
large error range».
Not exact matches
However, the three - point difference from the national average was within the
range of sampling
error, suggesting that their likelihood of experiencing a dissolved marriage is the same as that of the population at -
large.
The greater depth in the KELT paper means they arrive at a slightly
larger planet radius (1.29 ± 0.10 Jupiter radii) than we do (1.20 ± 0.06) but here the
error ranges overlap.
The
larger scale of these studies reduces
error, and their frequent use of a wider
range of outcome measures allows more understanding of the
range of effects of particular strategies or interventions.
In this conversation you cite unceratinty of RSS data that are almost twice
larger than trend (+ -0,26), although Mears and Weinz (2005) state that
error range of RSS T2LT is 0.09!!!
One estimate of that
error for the MSU 2 product (a weighted average of tropospheric + lower stratospheric trends) is that two different groups (UAH and RSS) come up with a
range of tropical trends of 0.048 to 0.133 °C / decade — a much
larger difference than the simple uncertainty in the trend.
For NWP forecasts, model
error is not usually so dominant that a reforecast set is needed but for the subseasonal to seasonal
range model
error is too
large to be ignored.
I can claim I'm very accurate because my models predict a temperature between absolute zero and the surface temperature of the sun, but that
error range is so
large, it means I'm not really predicting anything.
The reason for the form here of Jeffreys» prior is fairly clear — where the calibration curve is steep and hence its derivative with respect to calendar age is
large, the
error probability (red shaded area) between two nearby values of t14C corresponds to a much smaller ti
range than when the derivative is small.
To estimate the uncertainty
range (2σ) for mean tropical SST cooling, we consider the
error contributions from (a)
large - scale patterns in the ocean data temperature field, which hamper a direct comparison with a coarse - resolution model, and (b) the statistical
error for each reconstructed paleo - temperature value.
One might (or might not) argue for such a relation if the models were empirically adequate, but given nonlinear models with
large systematic
errors under current conditions, no connection has been even remotely established for relating the distribution of model states under altered conditions to decision - relevant probability distributions... There may well exist thresholds, or tipping points (Kemp 2005), which lie within this
range of uncertainty.
building energy (e.g. gas and electricity) is entered in monetary values, due to the
large range of energy tariffs and therefore the likely
error margin with this calculation method.
Any global metric that attempts to capture and summarize a
range of
large - scale and complex phenomena is sure to entail simplifications, biases,
errors, and gaps.
On the other hand, if the distribution of a model ensemble is relatively narrow, then the observed values will lie towards the edge or outside the
range of the model ensemble, and then the rank histogram will form a V - or even U-shaped distribution with
large end bins depending on the severity of this
error.