Sentences with phrase «less model uncertainty»

Remove the 11 questionable reconstructions and you're left with a lot less model uncertainty; I expect that might be reduced further if they used the more appropriate inverse (proxies on temperature) calibration.

Not exact matches

There's a lot to consider, like the uncertainty of bitcoin's value — and there's the risk that the extra graphics cards you buy will become less efficient at mining when newer models are released.

Uncertainties around Model 3 production are causing buyers to consider less expensive alternatives.

That means researchers have less information and higher uncertainties when it comes to translating the data into measurements that the models can use, such as air temperature and humidity.

The Standard Model of Physics predicts such one - in - ten - billion odds with an uncertainty of less than ten percent.

(in general, whether for future projections or historical reconstructions or estimates of climate sensitivity, I tend to be sympathetic to arguments of more rather than less uncertainty because I feel like in general, models and statistical approaches are not exhaustive and it is «plausible» that additional factors could lead to either higher or lower estimates than seen with a single approach.

In fact it is the opposite — Hansen is actually claiming that the uncertainty in models (for instance, in the climate sensitivity) is now less than the uncertainty in the emissions scenarios (i.e. it is the uncertainty in the forcings, that drives the uncertainty in the projections).

Kevin Trenberth of the National Center for Atmospheric Research made this point powerfully last year in an important piece in the journal Nature Reports / Climate Change warning that more uncertainty, not less, would likely result from a push to enrich climate models used for the next report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change:

I personally think IPCC will lose less by openly conceding that clouds have always been «the largest source of uncertainty» and that it now appears that some of tis «uncertainty» is being cleared up, with the models no longer predicting a net positive cloud feedback as before.

There is still quite a lot of uncertainty with this system, with the GFS model predicting it to be less likely than the ECMWF does that we'll be hit by this storm.

Why isn't a TCR type of simulation, but instead using actual history and 200 year projected GHG levels in the atmosphere, that would produce results similar to a TCR simulation (at least for the AGW temp increase that would occur when the CO2 level is doubled) and would result in much less uncertainty than ECS (as assessed by climate model dispersions), a more appropriate metric for a 300 year forecast, since it takes the climate more than 1000 years to equilibrate to the hypothesized ECS value, and we have only uncertain methods to check the computed ECS value with actual physical data?

Although the first two sources of model uncertainty - different climate sensitivities and regional climate change patterns - are usually represented in climate scenarios, it is less common for the third and fourth sources of uncertainty - the variable signal - to - noise ratio and incomplete description of key processes and feedbacks - to be effectively treated.

The resulting estimates are less dependent on global climate models and allow more realistically for forcing uncertainties than similar estimates based on forcings diagnosed from simulations by such models.

However, if in addition the IPSL - CM5A - LR model is replaced by a second copy of IPSL - CM5B - LR — giving a 2 - to - 1 weighting in favour of IPSL's more advanced, improved CM5B model over the earlier CM5A version rather than vice versa — the resulting weighted CMIP5 model ECS uncertainty distribution differs little from the raw unweighted distribution, apart from ECS values below 2.5 °C being less likely.

However, the mean of predictions of all models reproduced experimental data, with an uncertainty of less than 10 % of measured yields.

Mears agrees the satellite record shows less warming than models expect in recent years, but he also emphasizes potential problems and uncertainties with the satellite data.