Sentences with phrase «y axis»

Notes: Y axis of graph starts at three for illustrative purposes only.
The minimum negative marital quality was 1 and the maximum was 4; y axis represents the 20th to the 80th percentile.
Here is a histogram of the average of these two items (N on the y axis; each speed - dater rated ~ 12 targets): We might be missing some exceptionally attractive people, but otherwise, this looks pretty uniform.
We fixed an issue where the caret might jump to the beginning of the line, rather than maintaining current y axis position when using the up and down arrow keys in a textbox in Microsoft Edge.
The phrase «steep learning curve» means to describe a particular plot on a graph where the x axis measures time and the y axis measures the degree of learning acquired; in such a setup, a steep curve means that a lot of learning takes place rapidly, exactly opposite to the meaning that most people give it, they presumably seeing it in the context of climbing, where steepness is difficult and is conquered only slowly.
(And the y axis is a bit naughty).
Frequency of occurrence (y axis) of local temperature anomalies divided by local standard deviation (x axis) obtained by counting gridboxes with anomalies in each 0.05 standard deviation interval.
Eric@355 I didn't understand the y axis in the plot in Christy's wsj piece.
Make the.5 C change of the 10 decades in the «hockey stick» rise look a bit paltry — it's just the starting and ending points are at different places on the Y axis.
My point is that looking at a table of absolute temperatures (or expanding the y axis in a graph to show these) can be more intuitive and in some instances express better the relative magnitude of the observed changes.
First of all, I am not sure which graph you are looking at but both graphs have the same Y axis values — with a maximum deviation of 2 degrees in the top one and 1.5 degrees in the bottom.
On the panels — can you redo them so they all have the same Y axis?
Ignore natural variation, and what remains is a shallow downward trend that looks vaguely scary only because of the scale of the y axis.
Is the unit on the y axis degrees C / 100?
Dr Climate, I like the graph, but I just want to be sure about the y axis.
What is on the y axis?
But I'm wondering why there are no units on the y axis.
Also he did not say what he was plotting on the Y axis, we were led to believe that it was ºC in subsequent answers to questions.
But I'm afraid I'm still clueless enough about the methodology that I have to ask: what about their scaled - up hockey stick being an order of magnitude «smaller» than the MBH curve (see the y axis)?
It never ceases to amaze me how much importance mankind has been willing to give to a (now bogus) graph that shows a left hand side Y axis that is less than.6 degrees in scale (showing.2 degree increments).
That makes me worry that Günther Kirschbaum's observation that the Y axis on the graphs doesn't have a constant scale in degrees / pixel.
Your graph does not advance your cause, if the temperature range on your Y axis is supposed to be global something.
Just one above the other in measurements of y axis.
The scale on the y axis suggests we are talking about minutia in any case.
If we could plot a graph with C02 volume on the x axis and temperature on the y axis then the relationship between C02 and temperature would by described by a curve that eventually flattens out.
The trend lines for min temperatures on windy and calm time periods for 290 stations over the time period from 1950 - 2000, while intersecting the y axis at significantly different points (the windy trend lines always showing higher temperatures but the amount can depend on season), both trend at a 0.20 degree C per decade rate.
The trend lines for max temperatures on windy and calm time periods have essentially the same slope but intersect the y axis at different values with the windy trend lines on average intersected at higher temperatures but this relationship can flip depending on season of the year and region of the globe.
If we could plot a graph with co2 volume on the x axis and temperature on the y axis then the relationship between c02 and temperature would by described by a curve that eventually flattens out.
(B) Nondimensional stationary wave number squared (the curve, left y axis) and resonance zonal wave number k (the straight line, right y axis) at the QRA event.
In figure 2 above, the distribution of samples used in climate reconstructions based on year - ring width, the Y axis is the «number of samples, pcs.»
Y axis label: Number of samples, [pieces?
Left Y axis label: Latitude Right Y axis label: Temperature X axis label: Years (BCE CE)
Their respective x and y axis scales have both been modified to be proportionately similar to AR5 Figure 1.4's x and y axis scales.
The left hand key to colors is a little confusing, as it looks like it might be a label for the y axis.
[Left Y axis: Latitude; Right Y axis: Temperature; X axis: Years (BCE CE)-RSB-
The Y axis gives the efficiency of absorption
Furthermore if the Y axis was correct on the first graph it would also show the difference between 1998 - 2010 and 1900 - 1940 was about 0.03 C.
But I made clear in the Y axis labels that what was represented was probability density.
Which made us examine the y axis a little better.
Too bad too few people take the time to look at and digest the x and y axis and what it means.
Figure 1 The Y axis is a reconstructed global temperature anomaly from the 1961 - 1990 mean.
using 294.2 Wm - 2 for the oceans and 289K for the surface air temperature I get this plot with the giss minus sst2 plotted versus the right y axis.
Selection of x and y axis gives an impression of great increase.
(Note that the Y axis in the left panel is GtC; multiply by 44/12 to convert to CO2)
The histogram on the y axis uses the relationship between the past and the future to obtain a projection of future changes.»
To be useful and scientificaly rigorous I should replot all the data, with all the GRIP data in a different color, with the y axis marked on the right side with actual GRIP temperatures, and GISP2 temperatures marked on the left side, lined up so the 1855 data in both sets was the same on the y axis.
Markus Rex graphs shows a linear trend for the increasing PSC volume, and the left y axis the POTENTIAL OZONE LOSS (not the measured one, am I right?)
That dotted line is high on the Y axis if it is supposed to be showing the average loss.
It would be even more fun if you reverse the x or y axis.
The picture at the top — used to illustrate the original post — is a composite, without spaces between the pieces, and if you just look at the picture without finding the description, you'll boggle when you read the numbers along the Y axis.
a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z