Sentences with phrase «many sensitivity studies»

Sensitivity studies indicate that the Arctic stratosphere is currently at a threshold of denitrification.

«We showed that the model accurately represents what we measured in cities, so now we can use it to conduct sensitivity studies, where only a single variable — the percentage of the city covered by impervious versus pervious materials — changes,» he said.

He stresses that they are not firm predictions, but are «sensitivity studies».

The original publication: Toohey, M., K. Krüger and C. Timmreck (2013), Volcanic sulfate deposition to Greenland and Antarctica: A modeling sensitivity study, J. Geophys.

A sensitivity study for solar in the HadCM3 model showed that it probably underestimates solar with a factor 2 (see Stott ea.)

A 3 - D model for the Antarctic ice sheet: a sensitivity study on the glacial - interglacial contrast.

A summary of recent climate sensitivity studies can be found here.

A parameter sensitivity study for iterative correction

A sensitivity study of the LIdar - Radiometer Inversion Code (LIRIC) using selected cases from Thessaloniki, Greece database

3) His insulin sensitivity study has nothing to do with Paleo or real food diets.

Other AgMIP initiatives include global gridded modeling, data and information technology (IT) tool development, simulation of crop pests and diseases, site - based crop - climate sensitivity studies, and aggregation and scaling.

6) SWR Research has led us to make sensitivity studies.

Our sensitivity studies show a wide range of tolerance relating to the details.

I recommend that the cautious plan on a withdrawal rate of 4.6 % to 5.1 % (plus inflation) as indicated by the sensitivity study.

I made a sensitivity study of fixed stock allocations and changes in valuations in terms of Safe Withdrawal Rates.

I include a sensitivity study.

I used 0 % per year in my sensitivity study.

Temper your actions from what you learn from sensitivity studies.

We refer to these as sensitivity studies.

Notes through April 18, 2006 Revisiting P / E10, Revisiting P / E10: Dividends, NFB Closed, Links Repaired, The Big Project, Calculator D, Long - Term Stock Returns, My Most Recent Articles, Dividend Calculators A and B, Dividend Growth Sensitivity Study, Three Powerful Advantages of Dividend Strategies, Calculator H, CTVR Calculator A, Dividends and Constant Terminal Value Rates, HCTVR Calculator A, May 2006 Highlights, Investment Traps, Variable Terminal Value Rate Calculator A, Variable Terminal Value Rate Calculator B, Why People Ignore Valuations, Latching Calculators, Latched Threshold Survey, Investing for Dummy — The Six «Must Know» Rules, Early Success with Latch and Hold, Continued Success with Latch and Hold, Adding Constraints to Latch and Hold, Time To Catch Up Calculator Notes through June 12, 2006

Revisiting P / E10, Revisiting P / E10: Dividends, NFB Closed, Links Repaired, The Big Project, Calculator D, Long - Term Stock Returns, My Most Recent Articles, Dividend Calculators A and B, Dividend Growth Sensitivity Study, Three Powerful Advantages of Dividend Strategies, Calculator H, CTVR Calculator A, Dividends and Constant Terminal Value Rates, HCTVR Calculator A, May 2006 Highlights, Investment Traps, Variable Terminal Value Rate Calculator A, Variable Terminal Value Rate Calculator B, Why People Ignore Valuations, Latching Calculators, Latched Threshold Survey, Investing for Dummy — The Six «Must Know» Rules, Early Success with Latch and Hold, Continued Success with Latch and Hold, Adding Constraints to Latch and Hold, Time To Catch Up Calculator Notes through June 12, 2006 The Lower Latch and Hold Threshold, Additional Constraints with Latch and Hold, Current Research I: Latch and Hold, Dividend Investors, The Accumulation Stage, Idiot Switching, Latch and Hold Spreadsheet A, Typical Values of P / E10, Growth with Switching, Special Note about Mean Reversion, No New Discovery This Time, Looking a Little Bit Harder, The Stock - Return Predictor, Calculator I. Notes starting June 13, 2006.

A Special Kind of Investment Sensitivity Study

Notes starting January 14, 2007 Notes starting February 26, 2007 covered the following topics: Simple Path to 5 %, Why It Works, Flaws in the Traditional Theory, A Special Kind of Investment, Dividend Baseline: Expanded, Fluctuating Dividends, Fluctuating Dividends with a Growth Kicker, Income Stream Insights, A Special Kind of Investment Sensitivity Study, A Special Kind of Investment Addendum, Diversifying Risk, TIPS Table, How Did Common - Sense Investing Become Controversial?

In this sensitivity study, I introduce a lower yielding Investment B that has a stable or slowly growing dividend amount.

Through a series of sensitivity studies, I found that these payout percentages work with almost any combination of TIPS and stock allocations.

We have included sensitivity studies involving TIPS interest rates.

Dividend Growth to the Rescue I ran a sensitivity study.

Simple Path to 5 %, Why It Works, A Special Kind of Investment, Dividend Baseline: Expanded, Fluctuating Dividends, Fluctuating Dividends with a Growth Kicker, Income Stream Insights, A Special Kind of Investment Sensitivity Study, A Special Kind of Investment Addendum, Subtle Observation about Dividend Capture, Dividend Blend Rule of Thumb, Dividend Growth and Bond Ladders, Dividend Growth Rule of Thumb, Dividend Growth Story; Sometimes Dividends Get Cut; Dividend Disaster; Dividend Quality.

One of our Numbers Guys had done a sensitivity study showing that the results of the conventional - methodology studies are highly unreliable.

Sensitivity Studies and the Reality Checker Addendum

In this sensitivity study, I introduce a lower yielding Investment that has a stable or slowly growing dividend amount.

A Special Kind of Investment A Special Kind of Investment Sensitivity Study A Special Kind of Investment Addendum

This did not include a full sensitivity study.

The sensitivity studies in the original paper didn't include that the no - dendro / no - Tiljander combination but that does not justify the claims made by Montford that such a combination was impossible or was not included because it undermined the results.

Do you think that in the same way that the Solanki et al paper on solar sunspot reconstructions had a specific statement that their results did not contradict ideas of strong greenhouse warming in recent decades, this (the fact that climate sensitivity projections are not best estimates of possible future actual temperature increases) should be clearly noted in media releases put out by scientists when reporting climate sensitivity studies?

The link is based on a single modelling sensitivity study (Rotstayn and Lohmann, 2002) which looked at only the changes in the indirect effect from the pre-industrial (ca. 1850) to the present day.

Now you get it correct: I claim that the linear response models («sensitivity studies») are fundamentally insufficient for the purpose of prediction and «policy making».

While you are running your «sensitivity studies» it would be helpful if you were to release your CO2 - only data.

Thanks Pete and Gavin for your response in # 116 that the estimates for future temperature change being discussed in the climate sensitivity studies (discussed in this thread) do not generally take into account the effect of increased temperature on initiating further natural carbon release.

It featured the incorrect Spencer and Christie analysis, a comparison with a GCM simulation done with steady 1 % CO2 increase and no aerosol forcint (meant as a sensitivity study, not a forecast!)

I noticed yesterday (but neglected to mention) that there is no link to the Bernsten team's sensitivity study in the Research Council of Norway's press release.

It serves to show individual climate sensitivity studies are never conclusive but add up bits of fresh understanding to an already enormous pile of data and knowledge.

I did not propose the results of these sensitivity studies as an «alternative» and «more robust» chronology.

Sensitivity studies were made to improve the simulation of high latitude temperature and hydrology and thus the thermohaline circulation, an important aspect of the ocean's role in climate.

S12 is another flawed sensitivity study like Schmittner et al. (2011).

The question to ask modelers is whether they have done sensitivity studies, and then examine the range of answers based on the high / low values of aerosols forcings that have empirical support based on in - field measurements.

So various of the shortcomings of such climate sensitivity studies that you allude to also apply to many detection and attribution studies, as you no doubt appreciate, although problems with biased Bayesian inference apply only to such climate sensitivity studies.

We can answer this question by performing another set of sensitivity studies where we consider only the effects of indirect forcing uncertainties.

Forest 2006, along with several other climate sensitivity studies, used simulations by the MIT 2D model of zonal surface and upper - air temperatures and global deep - ocean temperature, the upper - air data being least influential.

The projection that was actually closest to the temps was Scenario C though (that was the sensitivity study with a drastic reduction of C02 emissions), so we accomplished by doing nothing what Hansen's 1988 GCM claimed we'd accomplish by huge reductions of CO2 emissions...