TAbMEP Assessment: POLARCAT H 2 O Measurements. Assessment Summary Table 1. Recommended POLARCAT H 2 O measurement treatment AircraftInstrument Reported.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

NOTATION & ASSUMPTIONS 2 Y i =  1 +  2 X 2i +  3 X 3i + U i Zero mean value of U i No serial correlation Homoscedasticity Zero covariance between U.

Advertisements

Adjustment of Global Gridded Precipitation for Systematic Bias Jennifer Adam Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering University of Washington.

Module 61 Module 6: Uncertainty Don’t just calculate—first think about sources of error, and don’t double-count errors.

A frequency table is an organized count of items or values. In its simplest form a frequency table shows how frequently each particular value occurs in.

Inter-comparison of retrieved CO 2 from TCCON, combining TCCON and TES to the overpass flight data Le Kuai 1, John Worden 1, Susan Kulawik 1, Kevin Bowman.

Calculating The Estimates And Weights For The Vacancy Rate Prepared for the 2010 SDC-CIC Joint Steering Committee Meetings February 24, 2010 Edward C.

Confidence Intervals Mon, March 22 nd. Point & Interval Estimates  Point estimate – use sample to estimate exact statistic to represent pop parameter.

THE PHYSICAL BASIS OF SST MEASUREMENTS Validation and evaluation of derived SST products 1.To develop systematic approaches to L4 product intercomparison.

Statistical Treatment of Data Significant Figures : number of digits know with certainty + the first in doubt. Rounding off: use the same number of significant.

Bootstrap Estimation of the Predictive Distributions of Reserves Using Paid and Incurred Claims Huijuan Liu Cass Business School Lloyd’s of London 11/07/2007.

P Fig. 6-1, p. 193 Fig. 6-2, p. 193 Fig. 6-3, p. 195.

Chapter 9 Assessing Studies Based on Multiple Regression.

Stat 321 – Day 24 Point Estimation (cont.). Lab 6 comments Parameter  Population Sample Probability Statistics A statistic is an unbiased estimator for.

1Prof. Dr. Rainer Stachuletz Panel Data Methods y it =  0 +  1 x it  k x itk + u it.

AVAPS – Dropsonde HS Field Program & Global Hawk NOAA G-4 Intercomparison HS3 Science Meeting May 5-6, 2015 NCAR EOL ISF 2015 Terry Hock 1, Holger.

Compare Outcomes Using all the above specific categories, we could compare 0-4 year-old male Asian mortality rates for asthma with 0-4 Asian female rates.

DATA QUALITY and ANALYSIS Strategy for Monitoring Post-fire Rehabilitation Treatments Troy Wirth and David Pyke USGS – Biological Resources Division Forest.

Clinical Pharmacology Subcommittee of the Advisory Committee for Pharmaceutical Science Meeting April 22, 2003 Pediatric Population Pharmacokinetics Study.

University of Florida Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering 1 Useful Tips for Presenting Data and Measurement Uncertainty Analysis Ben Smarslok.

ICARTT Measurement Comparison NASA DC-8 vs. NOAA WP-3D Gao Chen Tom Ryerson Bill Brune and INTEX-NA Science Team.

V. Rouillard  Introduction to measurement and statistical analysis ASSESSING EXPERIMENTAL DATA : ERRORS Remember: no measurement is perfect – errors.

EFFECT SIZE Parameter used to compare results of different studies on the same scale in which a common effect of interest (response variable) has been.

EPA Precursor Gas Training Workshop Precursor Gas Quality Assurance Implementation Dennis K. Mikel EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.

Audit Sampling Chapter 9. McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2008 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 9-2 What is Audit Sampling?  Applying a procedure.

STA Lecture 161 STA 291 Lecture 16 Normal distributions: ( mean and SD ) use table or web page. The sampling distribution of and are both (approximately)

PROBABILITY (6MTCOAE205) Chapter 6 Estimation. Confidence Intervals Contents of this chapter: Confidence Intervals for the Population Mean, μ when Population.

Measurement Uncertainty. Measurements Accuracy - hitting the center of the target Precision - tight pattern of hits Bias - all two inches high Uncertainty.

Measurement Uncertainties Physics 161 University Physics Lab I Fall 2007.

Using Scientific Measurements. Uncertainty in Measurements All measurements have uncertainty. 1.Measurements involve estimation by the person making the.

Scientific Measurement Making Sensible Measurements.

Estimates of Global Sea Level Rise from Tide Gauges Sea level trend,

Uncertainty & Error “Science is what we have learned about how to keep from fooling ourselves.” ― Richard P. FeynmanRichard P. Feynman.

Lecture 2 Forestry 3218 Lecture 2 Statistical Methods Avery and Burkhart, Chapter 2 Forest Mensuration II Avery and Burkhart, Chapter 2.

SlopeInterceptR2R2 # points Average difference (pptv) Stdev of difference (pptv) Lab Canister difference max|min DC-8 vs WP-3D Ethane 0.98 ± ±

Calibration Involves fixing known points and constructing a scale between these fixed points. Causal Link A change in one variable that results from, or.

Uncertainty in Measurement

Workshop on Price Index Compilation Issues February 23-27, 2015 Imputation of Missing Values, Seasonal Products and Quality Changes Gefinor Rotana Hotel,

An Overview of EPA’s Quality Assurance Guidance for Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Data Data Analysis and Interpretation February 12 – 14, 2008, Tempe,

ME Mechanical and Thermal Systems Lab Fall 2011 Chapter 3: Assessing and Presenting Experimental Data Professor: Sam Kassegne, PhD, PE.

Chapter 8: Confidence Intervals based on a Single Sample

Errors and Uncertainties In Measurements and in Calculations.

Andreas Behrendt 25 March 2003IHOP Workshop IHOP Intercomparisons Selection of Case Studies & First Quicklooks Andreas Behrendt, Thorsten Schaberl, Hans-Stefan.

Measurement Quality Objectives = Data Validation Requirements Excerpted from EPA QA Handbook Volume II (aka “Redbook”)

Errors. Random Errors A random error is due to the effects of uncontrolled variables. These exhibit no pattern. These errors can cause measurements to.

R&R Homework Statgraphics “Range Method”. DATA OperatorPartTrialMeasure B B B B B B326.5 B B B C

Statistics for Business and Economics 8 th Edition Chapter 7 Estimation: Single Population Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice.

Errors and Uncertainties In Measurements and in Calculations.

Statistical Estimation

Chapter 9 Audit Sampling 1.

Comparing Theory and Measurement

Uncertainty, Measurements and Error Analysis

Using local variable without initialization is an error.

Summary of FMS/Jet Meetings

chance Learning impeded by two processes: Bias , Chance

LASE Measurements of Water Vapor During IHOP

Section 2 Measurement: Errors, Accuracy, and Precision

Errors and Uncertainties

Sampling and Sample Size Calculations

Data Data comes in many forms. Today we will learn about the different types of data, how we can describe data, and also discover how uncertainty of.

UNIT 3 MEASUREMENT AND DATA PROCESSING

Problem DC 10-1, Page 547 (Original Problem)

Uncertainty in Measurement

Point-of-Care vs Laboratory INR Testing to Optimize Anticoagulation Management.

STA 291 Spring 2008 Lecture 13 Dustin Lueker.

Sample vs Population (true mean) (sample mean) (sample variance)

Distribution-free Monte Carlo for population viability analysis

Precision & Uncertainties

Comparing Theory and Measurement

Table 6. Vector Error Correction Estimates

Std. Error of the Estimate

Presentation transcript:

TAbMEP Assessment: POLARCAT H 2 O Measurements

Assessment Summary Table 1. Recommended POLARCAT H 2 O measurement treatment AircraftInstrument Reported 2σ Uncertainty Recommended Bias Correction Recommended 2σ Uncertainty NASA DC-8DLH5% H 2 O DC8 {( H 2 O) 2 + (.07) 2 } 1/2 NOAA WP-3DAOC5% H 2 O WP3D {( H 2 O) 2 + (0.308) 2 } 1/2 NASA P-3B 10% H 2 O P3B {( H 2 O) 2 + (.834) 2 } 1/2 DLR FALCON 10% H 2 O DLR {( H 2 O) 2 + (0.166) 2 } 1/2 ATR-42 FALCON 10% H 2 O ATR42 10% a a The PI reported uncertainty was recommended because no IEIP precision value could be calculated for the ATR-42 Falcon data

Assessment Summary Cont. Intercomparison Data Within the Recommended Uncertainty DC-8 vs. WP-3D45% DC-8 vs. P-3D62% DC-8 vs. DLR94% DLR vs. ATR-4276% Only the DC-8 vs. DLR Falcon intercomparison meets the condition that 90% of data fall within the 2σ uncertainty bounds, making it a TAbMEP unified data set Remaining intercomparisons contain systematic error that cannot be fully accounted for in uncertainty calculations, causing the recommended uncertainties to be insufficient for TAbMEP unified data set requirements Table 2. TAbMEP unified data sets

Assessment Summary Cont. Table 3. POLARCAT H 2 O bias estimates AircraftInstrument Apparent Bias (a g/kg + b H 2 O) Best Estimate Bias (a g/kg + b H 2 O) NASA DC-8DLH H 2 O DC8 NOAA WP-3DAOC H 2 O DC H 2 O WP3D NASA P-3B H 2 O DC H 2 O P3B DLR FALCON H 2 O DC H 2 O DLR ATR-42 FALCON H 2 O DC H 2 O ATR42

Assessment Summary Cont. FlightPlatform IEIP Precision Expected VariabilityObserved Variability Adjusted Precision 4/12 DC-82.2% 15.6% 2.2% WP-3D 15.4% 4/8 DC-81.5% 12.5% 1.5% P-3B 12.4% 4/19 DC-83.5% 41.8% 3.5% P-3B 41.7% 7/10 DC-82.5% 7.85% 2.5% P-3B 7.4% 7/9 DC-82.5% 8.66% 2.5% DLR Falcon 8.3% 4/15 P-3B 9.63% WP-3D 7/14 DLR Falcon 20.5% ATR-42 Falcon Table 4. POLARCAT H 2 O precision (1σ) comparisons

P-3B vs. DC-8

P-3B vs. DC-8 04/08/2008

DC-8 04/08/2008 IEIP = 1.5%

DC-8 04/08/2008 STD = g/kg

P-3B vs. DC-8 04/08/2008

P-3B vs. DC-8 04/19/2008

DC-8 04/19/2008 IEIP = 3.5%

DC-8 04/19/2008 STD = g/kg

P-3B vs. DC-8 04/19/2008

P-3B vs. DC-8 07/10/2008

DC-8 07/10/2008 IEIP = 2.5%

DC-8 07/10/2008 STD = g/kg

P-3B vs. DC-8 07/10/2008

P-3B vs. DC-8 All Flights

WP-3D vs. DC-8 04/12/2008

DC-8 04/12/2008 IEIP = 2.2%

DC-8 04/12/2008 STD = g/kg

WP-3D vs. DC-8 04/12/2008

P-3B vs. WP-3D 04/15/2008

DLR Falcon vs. DC-8 07/09/2008

DC-8 07/09/2008 IEIP = 2.5%

DC-8 07/09/2008 STD = g/kg

DLR Falcon vs. DC-8 07/09/2008

DLR Falcon vs. ATR-42 Falcon 07/14/2008