Sentences with phrase «see model validation»

To TangoMan who wants to see model validation.

Not exact matches

See Ricoeur's discussion of the problem of validation vis a vis Hirsch in «The Model of the Text», op.cit.,158 - 162.

The validation of the procedure was done on the data extracted from simulated roots (see Appendix Text: Section S1.D) and is shown in Appendix Figs S5 — S7 for each model.

«We actually view it as flattery, we see Overdrive's imitation of our lend - first model as validation that it is a wise investment for libraries, and that it is the best way to end patron dissatisfaction and provide timely, topical and relevant titles to patrons.»

Try reading the chapter on model validation in AR5 — you'll never see a more comprehensive critique (if by «comprehensive» one means «specific, serious and constructive»).

We have been treated to many opportunistic hindsight «validations» of climate modeling (Pakistan, Russia, etc.) using the «consistent with» meme that most scientists would see as very weak evidence.

Generally we find that the models actually do a reasonable job (see here or here for examples of different groups model validation papers).

When will we see similar «double blind» validation and verification of global climate models?

For more on these validity tests see IPCC model validation.

See here for a discussion of the literature about model validation (see the end section here for links to the literaturSee here for a discussion of the literature about model validation (see the end section here for links to the literatursee the end section here for links to the literature).

Unfortunately the validation of the models was not reported in [the original report] either... I am very curious to see the methods of validation they used and the actual results they obtained.

Also, I would like to see some real validation of models rather than backcasting and continuous adjustment.

If you have time you may want to look at «Validation and forecasting accuracy in models of climate change» by Fildes and Kourentzes (see http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169207011000604) and the comment by Noel Keenlyside in the same issue.

In fact, from the validation I have seen and the difference with «naive» 1D models or purely phenological extrapolations / fits, you will have to argue a lot before I accept to let them go out of «experimental».

I see two things here, (1) the need to go back to the drawing board on climate modeling with special attention to the causes of natural variations and with a rigorously independent validation program, and (2) the world community needs to be exposed to the real debates in climate science rather than statements amounting to a consensus of those who already agree with a certain consensus.

The model for creating new growth that we see in successful innovation hubs everywhere involves two sides: the entrepreneurial side, responsible for managing the discovery, validation and development of new businesses, and the venture side, responsible for managing a portfolio of these businesses with the use of investment theses and funding decisions in order to shape and ultimately capture new value.

IOTA has seen many of the issues Bitcoin and Ethereum have with the POW (proof - of - work) and POI (proof - of - importance) models and looks to improve them with their revolutionary transaction validation network simply called «tangle».

When I'm evaluating new businesses and new business models (see my article, The Two Principles of Startup Success), I always look for business model validation (does this work in one market?)