Sentences with phrase «when estimating the uncertainty»

Given current uncertainties in representing convective precipitation microphysics and the current inability to find a clear obser - vational constraint that favors one version of the authors» model over the others, the implications of this ability to engineer climate sensitivity need to be considered when estimating the uncertainty in climate projections.»

Question from a novice: how is this spacial noise — or poor spatial correlation — taken into account when estimating the uncertainty on the average temperature?

Not exact matches

When the interannual variation caused by weather is excluded, uncertainty estimates for soil carbon stock change become unrealistically small.

That would seem to be a good test of whether the method produces a good estimate of TCR independent of the uncertainty in E. I tried such a thing, and my main objection to the Shindell (2014) paper is that when I test the «simple» Otto method vs. the Shindell method on the same model set in the paper, the Otto et al (2013) method still seems to perform better.

Just when you estimate she's too put - together to have had a tough life, her willingness to share her almost unbelievable life journey, full of ups, downs, and plenty of uncertainty grounds her squarely into relatable territory.

As the prize consignment of the week — in a period of uncertainty, when trophies have been hard to come by — the Ames cache had been estimated to sell for at least $ 93 million.

When differences in scaling between previous studies are accounted for, the various current and previous estimates of NH mean surface temperature are largely consistent within uncertainties, despite the differences in methodology and mix of proxy data back to approximately A.D. 1000... Conclusions are less definitive for the SH and globe, which we attribute to larger uncertainties arising from the sparser available proxy data in the SH.

The cooling in the graph shown is indeed 0.1 °C only as you observed, the 0.3 °C arises when we, conservatively, estimate all uncertainties in the modeling and the forcings.

When I read the media PR on this, it looked like BEST claimed better statistical methods, leading to lower estimates of the uncertainty in the temperature change - even at the decadal level.

In my every day life it is useful even within uncertainties of 10 — 20 % (caused by uncertainty in predicted velocity) when estimating time of arrival.

When someone says «estimated... near 8.25» I become curious about the uncertainties (that is my scientific field).

When the emission estimates are compared over time, the resulting relative uncertainty is generally lower than the uncertainty of estimates for individual years.

The population is well defined when the model is defined and the uncertainties of the parameter estimates are specified.

When comparing 2017 to 2015, the smaller difference is less than the estimated uncertainty.

Then if they are pretty sure their method is right, it should hover around the uncertainty estimates they made and agree better with the other sets when there is less regional variability.

The authors give some hint when they write:» This suggests that estimates of the net negative radiative forcing due to the total ACI can also be significantly reduced and its uncertainty range could even include positive values.».

«When open burning emissions, which emit high levels of organic matter, are included in the total, the best estimate of net industrial - era climate forcing by all short - lived species from black - carbon - rich sources becomes slightly negative -LRB--0.06 W / m2 with 90 % uncertainty bounds of -1.45 to +1.29 W / m2).

It is well known that the ERFaero, the sum of direct aerosol forcing (ERFari) and ERFaci is by far the greatest source of uncertainty when it comes to observationally based estimates about the transient sensitivity (TCR) and the expected warming in this century.

Because Rayner et al. (2006) and Kennedy et al. (2011b) make no attempt to estimate temperatures in grid boxes which contain no observations, an additional uncertainty had to be computed when estimating area - averages.

When people talk about estimates, possibilities, large uncertainties, likelies, maybes, and suggestions; when their guesses range from 10 to 40 %, and from 1 to 80 % — they aren't saying much of anythWhen people talk about estimates, possibilities, large uncertainties, likelies, maybes, and suggestions; when their guesses range from 10 to 40 %, and from 1 to 80 % — they aren't saying much of anythwhen their guesses range from 10 to 40 %, and from 1 to 80 % — they aren't saying much of anything.

In the 2009 Outlook, most estimates overlapped each other when their uncertainty ranges were considered.

In other words, when estimating the value of a fixed but unknown parameter, does the true value lie outside the specified uncertainty range in the indicated proportion of cases?

Efficacy uncertainties are thought (per AR5) to be a large exent allowed for when ERF estimates are used, except for black carbon on snow.

Spatial sampling uncertainties were estimated by simulating poorly sampled periods (e.g. 1753 to 1850) with modern data (1960 to 2010) for which the Earth coverage was better than 97 % complete, and measuring the departure from the full site average when using only the limited spatial regions available at early times.

Furthermore, on these times scales the differences between MSU data sets are often not larger than published internal uncertainty estimates for the RSS product alone and therefore may not be statistically significant when the internal uncertainty in each data set is taken into account.

Interestingly, one of Frame's co-authors, Myles Allen, seems now to have abandoned the Frame 05 advocacy of using a uniform prior in S when estimating S («Quantifying and communicating uncertainty in climate prediction» lecture at Oslo conference, 2010).

When they define sensitivity or human contribution only with respect to their estimated forcings, it is implied that these are correct, but we know that the uncertainty with respect to clouds, aerosols, etc is large.

The proportion of low estimates (< 2 °C) reaches a whopping 42 % when the uncertainty is greatest (bottom - right panel in the figure).

When this is done, it is indeed possible to quantitatively compare the instrumental record of the past few decades with earlier estimates from the proxy reconstruction, within the context of the estimated uncertainties in the reconstructed values (again see the comparisons here, with the instrumental record clearly distinguished in red, the proxy reconstructions indicated by e.g. blue or green, and the uncertainties indicated by shading).

IEA Task 32 coordinated a comparative, or round robin, exercise to allow the industry to practice applying the new uncertainty guidelines and to also get an estimate of the differences in uncertainty when using Lidar with or in lieu of cup anemometers.

For instance, he emphasizes that when computing uncertainty in a trend estimate you have to take into account something called autocorrelation, which means the noise isn't the simple type called «white noise.»

By 2300, the central estimates of extra warming were more variable, and ranged from 0.13 to 1.69 °C when full uncertainty ranges were taken into account.

But when I compute a mean as my estimate and a standard deviation as its uncertainty, I'm assuming that each model is producing independent data, and I'm relying on the expectation that their errors will cancel each other out.

This qualitative uncertainty (i.e. no estimate of ice sheet melt) will now become an increased quantitative uncertainty when looking at sea level overall.

These errors, as well as the influence of decadal and multi-decadal variability in the climate, have been taken into account when estimating linear trends and their uncertainties (see Appendix 3.