Sentences with phrase «large signal to noise»

What is needed to show that models have skill are comparisons to data that is a) well characterised, and b) with a large signal to noise ratio.

Using global mean temperature, the variability associated with regional variability is averaged out, giving a larger signal to noise ratio.»

Not exact matches

Let's just say that the signal - to - noise ratio for investors has degraded substantially over the yearsIn spite of the large increase in investment information relative to the past, there is little evidence that active managers in aggregate have improved their performance relative to passive strategies.

However, due to the large «noise» signals at some local coastal sites, it won't be until later this decade or early next decade before the accelerations in sea level are detection at these individual tide gauge sites.»

Nonetheless, even if the substantial recent trend in the AO pattern is simply a product of natural multidecadal variability in North Atlantic climate, it underscores the fact that western and southern Greenland is an extremely poor place to look, from a signal vs. noise point of view, for the large - scale polar amplification signature of anthropogenic surface warming.

«We are now finally crossing a threshold where, through very sophisticated modeling of large combined data sets from multiple independent observers, we can disentangle the noise due to stellar surface activity from the very tiny signals generated by the gravitational tugs from Earth - sized orbiting planets,» study coauthor Steven Vogt, professor of astronomy and astrophysics at UC Santa Cruz, said in a statement.

Overwhelming, with large amounts of data from disparate sources («It's challenging to separate the signal from the noise»).

11 May 2009 Terry Winters Signal to Noise at IMMA The first large - scale exhibition in Ireland by the renowned American artist Terry Winters opens to the public at the Irish Museum of Modern Art on Friday 12 June 2009.

It's been argued a significant trend is expected under a warming climate, but the signal - to - noise ratio is still too low in most places in Antarctica, even where the warming trend (e.g. WAIS) is quite large.

My understanding of most of the (lets call it) skeptical positions from people like Roy Spencer is that they essentially claim exactly that: the absence of a large signal compared to noise (or natural variability) and the entire debate is essentially about the question, whether noise is a measurement / statistical problem or the very nature of climate itself?

Of course, on a timescale of one decade the noise in the temperature signal from internal variability and measurement uncertainty is quite large, so this might be hard to determine, though tamino showed that five year means show a monotonic increase over recent decades, and one might not unreasonably expect this to cease for a decade in a grand solar minimum scenario.

As for additional topics, perhaps a brief explanation on why confidence in attribution (and prediction) of temperature change is strongest at large scales and weakest at small scales, ie something about the issue of signal to noise relative to spatial scale.

The large volcanic forcing signal basically obliterates the far smaller solar forcing signal, which can not be isolated in the presence of noise and other forcings from this reconstruction, yielding the spurious apparent negative response to solar irradiance.

Nonetheless, even if the substantial recent trend in the AO pattern is simply a product of natural multidecadal variability in North Atlantic climate, it underscores the fact that western and southern Greenland is an extremely poor place to look, from a signal vs. noise point of view, for the large - scale polar amplification signature of anthropogenic surface warming.

Here's his response: «A convincing greenhouse gas - driven change has not emerged in the data so far, in my view, and may well be «in the noise» due to both large natural variability (compared to the expected size of the greenhouse gas - driven signal) and data quality issues.»

This issue arises in tree - ring chronology construction too, balancing the inclusion of more data to reduce the noise (i.e. the sampling error) against the inclusion of data from too large an area such that the signal becomes ambiguous or even incompatible.

Regions showing large positive correlations between GRACE and ECCO, large fraction of ECCO variance explained by GRACE, and large signal - to - noise ratios include the northwestern Pacific Ocean, broad areas of the Southern Ocean, the South China Sea and the Arafura Sea.

We conduct a series of large ensemble simulations (7 experiments at 200 years each) to increase the signal - to - noise ratio in the stratosphere.

That doesn't mean that there isn't one, but it does mean that the noise is much larger than this «signal», and any attempt to remove the signal to extract the noise presumes a knowledge of the noise and signal that a) nobody has; and b) to the extent that it is input in the form of assumptions, begs all questions and proves nothing.

It requires a much stronger CO2 signal to be statistically certain at 17 years, and perhaps that is what he had in mind, but 0.2 C per decade isn't going to show up well in 17 years, being only a standard deviation or two larger than the noise, which may offset it in some decades.

Dole compared his team's findings to trying to hear a quiet conversation underneath the roar of a noisy fan: a summertime signal due to climate change over western Russia was drowned out by the much larger climate «noise,» or variability, resulting from natural processes.

Even if these adjustments are justifiable, and some like the time of observation adjustment are important, the fact is that the noise in the measurement is at least as large as the signal we are trying to measure, which should substantially reduce our confidence that we really know what is going on.