Sentences with phrase «such as negative feedback»

Instead, task a few employees to manage unexpected situations such as negative feedback from a customer.

Not exact matches

A look at using customer forums and review sites such as Yelp to generate sales, tips on responding to negative feedback, plus how and why to make it simple for customers to review you.

This skepticism about the future — even with asset prices rising — has created a negative feedback loop, driving investors to safe harbors such as cash, bonds, gold and yield - generating securities thereby reducing demand, inflation and growth in an ongoing vicious cycle.

If on the other hand, the child is given negative feedback such as «this is easy, what's wrong with you?»

The theory of dangerous climate change is based not just on carbon dioxide warming but on positive and negative feedback effects from water vapor and phenomena such as clouds and airborne aerosols from coal burning.

Thus, only human - made emissions, such as factory and car secretions, could cause runaway global climate change because they lack natural negative feedbacks to balance them.

Self - organized vegetation patterns are widespread in arid lands and elsewhere, and Rietkerk et al. [11]--[12] as well as Couteron and Lejeune [13]--[15] proposed that such patterns are the result of nearby positive and distant negative feedbacks created by plants and physical processes occurring at different scales and intensities.

avoiding anything that is thought to detract from self - esteem, such as criticism, negative feedback, failing or low grades, reporting on a student's position in class or year, using red pens on student work and the like

A few setbacks that will be fixed is a bad thing, not saying it isn't or that it's not worth demerits / penalties - but it's obvious that server problems at launch - as bad as they are to the consumers, to get such a hefty pounding over it where a reviewer is all like «I take my review back, I'm lowering my score until the servers get better - Oh hey, 6 months later the servers are better, here, have a 7.5 again» That does not sound professional no matter how you want to put it (Not like anyone goes to Polygon for anything professional anyways): / Short - comings or downfalls that are temporary should be given Shame I'd say, a definite negative feedback in some variety which comes all but naturally with the players whether a reviewer points it out or not, customer reviewers do that and I think should be used for these kind of problems.

Tabata further acknowledged that there is negative feedback for the game such as people not being happy about the character choices.

-LSB-[There can easily be cherry picking of feedbacks from the positive ones discussed above, to negative ones such as concentrated convection causing subsidence causing upper troposphere drying.]-RSB-

There can easily be cherry picking of feedbacks from the positive ones discussed above, to negative ones such as concentrated convection causing subsidence causing upper troposphere drying.

The proposed existence of strong negative feedbacks to balance all of this (such as Lindzen's proposed changes in cloud formation over the tropics) would hold temperatures relatively constant, and the ice ages couldn't and wouldn't happen.

When we say «positive» and «negative» feedbacks in the sense of radiation (so I'm not talking about carbon - cycle responses such as methane release from the oceans or such) we're referring to temperature - sensitive variables which themselves affect the radiation budget of the planet.

The whole ice - snow phenomenon looks very much like the negative feedback such as that being suggested by our Alex Pope.

Normally, it is a very controlled process defendant on specific feedbacks, such as a negative moderator temperature coefficient.

Complexity theory suggests that the system is pushed by such things as solar intensity and Earth orbital eccentricities — past a threshold at which stage the components start to interact chaotically in multiple and changing negative and positive feedbacks — as tremendous energies cascade through powerful subsystems.

Its warming effect, however, is simultaneously amplified and dampened by positive and negative feedbacks such as increased water vapor (the most powerful greenhouse gas), reduced albedo, which is a measure of Earth's reflectivity, changes in cloud characteristics, and CO2 exchanges with the ocean and terrestrial ecosystems.

The oscillatory nature of the signal can be thought of in terms of «braking,» whereby positive and negative feedbacks interact in such a way as to support reversals of the circulation regimes.

If not either the CO2 / temp relationship is wrong [I do not think so] or the effect of the CO2 rise is being variably effected by negative feedbacks such as increased cloud formation and albedo thus offsetting the CO2 related temperature rise.

To point out just a couple of things: — oceans warming slower (or cooling slower) than lands on long - time trends is absolutely normal, because water is more difficult both to warm or to cool (I mean, we require both a bigger heat flow and more time); at the contrary, I see as a non-sense theory (made by some serrist, but don't know who) that oceans are storing up heat, and that suddenly they will release such heat as a positive feedback: or the water warms than no heat can be considered ad «stored» (we have no phase change inside oceans, so no latent heat) or oceans begin to release heat but in the same time they have to cool (because they are losing heat); so, I don't feel strange that in last years land temperatures for some series (NCDC and GISS) can be heating up while oceans are slightly cooling, but I feel strange that they are heating up so much to reverse global trend from slightly negative / stable to slightly positive; but, in the end, all this is not an evidence that lands» warming is led by UHI (but, this effect, I would not exclude it from having a small part in temperature trends for some regional area, but just small); both because, as writtend, it is normal to have waters warming slower than lands, and because lands» temperatures are often measured in a not so precise way (despite they continue to give us a global uncertainity in TT values which is barely the instrumental's one)-- but, to point out, HadCRU and MSU of last years (I mean always 2002 - 2006) follow much better waters» temperatures trend; — metropolis and larger cities temperature trends actually show an increase in UHI effect, but I think the sites are few, and the covered area is very small worldwide, so the global effect is very poor (but it still can be sensible for regional effects); but I would not run out a small warming trend for airport measurements due mainly to three things: increasing jet planes traffic, enlarging airports (then more buildings and more asphalt — if you follow motor sports, or simply live in a town / city, you will know how easy they get very warmer than air during day, and how much it can slow night - time cooling) and overall having airports nearer to cities (if not becoming an area inside the city after some decade of hurban growth, e.g. Milan - Linate); — I found no point about UHI in towns and villages; you will tell me they are not large cities; but, in comparison with 20-40-60 years ago when they were «countryside», many small towns and villages have become part of larger hurban areas (at least in Europe and Asia) so examining just larger cities would not be enough in my opinion to get a full view of UHI effect (still remembering that it has a small global effect: we can say many matters are due to UHI instead of GW, maybe even that a small part of measured GW is due to UHI, and that GW measurements are not so precise to make us able to make good analisyses and predictions, but not that GW is due to UHI).

So either the underlying models are biased in that they can not generate net negative feedbacks, or their results have been fitted to non-negative distributions such as the gamma.

A deterministically chaotic system subject to control variables — such as CO2 — multiple positive and negative feedbacks and multiple equilibria.

We recently reported on a possible negative carbon feedback of forest soils in higher latitudes: when such soils warm, nutrient availability may increase, as would (therefore) biomass production and CO2 uptake.

These and other observations can be integrated into a model with feedbacks and having two unstable end ‐ points that is consistent both with classical studies of past climate states, and also with recent analysis of ice dynamics in the Arctic basin by Zhakarov, whose oscillatory model identifies feedback mechanisms in atmosphere and ocean, both positive and negative, that interact in such a manner as to prevent long ‐ term trends in either ice ‐ loss or ice ‐ gain on the Arctic Ocean to proceed to an ultimate state.

Water molecules in their various random chaotic forms are a net negative feedback element in cases such as increased solar radiation which can drive more WV into the atmosphere.

By the way, water is the only molecule in the upper atmosphere of significant quantity to radiate the balance of IR beyond the minor CO2 radiation plus the IR window radiation and as such is the primary earth cooling agent (including cloud reflection) and thus is a negative feedback to any actual changes in solar input energy.

Simply extrapolating historical trends also does not account for feedbacks in the system, such as the negative ice thickness - ice growth rate feedback identified by Bitz and Roe (2004) that can slow the ice volume rate of loss.

Do you feel equally as comfortable to argue, paleosensitivity = 2 - 4.5 K Therefore, the net cloud feedback is positive If no, then you must admit that it would be hard to test a net negative cloud feedback against paleo data without having any models available that include such a feedback.

Negative trends in q as found in the NCEP data would imply that long - term water vapor feedback is negative — that it would reduce rather than amplify the response of the climate system to external forcing such as that from increasing atmospheNegative trends in q as found in the NCEP data would imply that long - term water vapor feedback is negative — that it would reduce rather than amplify the response of the climate system to external forcing such as that from increasing atmosphenegative — that it would reduce rather than amplify the response of the climate system to external forcing such as that from increasing atmospheric CO2.

furthermore, permanent changes to the climate system (such as the Sun's output power changing) will have a permanent impact on the Earth's climate (but negative feedback would suggest this impact not as great as it might at first appear).

But scientists such as Lindzen make the argument that these feedbacks are wrong, and that they are more likely to be negative, leaving us with minor warming of 1C or less.

The only sense in which your argument for a negative water cycle feedback makes much sense is if you are grouping together cloud and water vapor effects in such a feedback (which I guess is not unreasonable when you refer to it as «water cycle» but becomes confusing when you refer to it as «water vapor feedback»).

RealClimate is wonderful, and an excellent source of reliable information.As I've said before, methane is an extremely dangerous component to global warming.Comment # 20 is correct.There is a sharp melting point to frozen methane.A huge increase in the release of methane could happen within the next 50 years.At what point in the Earth's temperature rise and the rise of co2 would a huge methane melt occur?No one has answered that definitive issue.If I ask you all at what point would huge amounts of extra methane start melting, i.e at what temperature rise of the ocean near the Artic methane ice deposits would the methane melt, or at what point in the rise of co2 concentrations in the atmosphere would the methane melt, I believe that no one could currently tell me the actual answer as to where the sharp melting point exists.Of course, once that tipping point has been reached, and billions of tons of methane outgass from what had been locked stores of methane, locked away for an eternity, it is exactly the same as the burning of stored fossil fuels which have been stored for an eternity as well.And even though methane does not have as long a life as co2, while it is around in the air it can cause other tipping points, i.e. permafrost melting, to arrive much sooner.I will reiterate what I've said before on this and other sites.Methane is a hugely underreported, underestimated risk.How about RealClimate attempts to model exactly what would happen to other tipping points, such as the melting permafrost, if indeed a huge increase in the melting of the methal hydrate ice WERE to occur within the next 50 years.My amateur guess is that the huge, albeit temporary, increase in methane over even three or four decades might push other relevent tipping points to arrive much, much, sooner than they normally would, thereby vastly incresing negative feedback mechanisms.We KNOW that quick, huge, changes occured in the Earth's climate in the past.See other relevent posts in the past from Realclimate.Climate often does not change slowly, but undergoes huge, quick, changes periodically, due to negative feedbacks accumulating, and tipping the climate to a quick change.Why should the danger from huge potential methane releases be vievwed with any less trepidation?

Overgeneralization: Generalizing based on a few limited occurrences, such as thinking you gave a terrible presentation because of the few negative feedback comments while ignoring the dozens of positive comments and praise.

This can include positive feedback, such as why a person's resume was appealing or what about the interview was especially compelling, or it can include negative feedback such as that the company is seeking a candidate with more experience in a certain area of the work.

As they get older, they may develop secondary problems, such as poor self esteem and anxiety, because they do not easily fit into the regular classroom and often receive negative feedback about themselves as studentAs they get older, they may develop secondary problems, such as poor self esteem and anxiety, because they do not easily fit into the regular classroom and often receive negative feedback about themselves as studentas poor self esteem and anxiety, because they do not easily fit into the regular classroom and often receive negative feedback about themselves as studentas students.

For instance, in their prospective study among young adolescents, Garber and Flynn (Garber and Flynn, 2001) found that negative self - worth develops as an outcome of low maternal acceptance, a maternal history of depression and exposure to negative interpersonal contexts, such as negative parenting practices, early history of child maltreatment, negative feedback from significant others on one's competence, and family discord and disruption.