2008
DOI: 10.1214/08-ba301
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Inferring climate system properties using a computer model

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
27
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 51 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
0
27
0
Order By: Relevance
“…calibrate a climate model (Sanso et al 2008;Sanso and Forest 2009;Sham Bhat et al 2012;Drignei et al 2008). The GP approach to computer model emulation assumes that the output of interest is a Gaussian process in some set of inputs that vary across model runs.…”
Section: Alternative Emulation Strategiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…calibrate a climate model (Sanso et al 2008;Sanso and Forest 2009;Sham Bhat et al 2012;Drignei et al 2008). The GP approach to computer model emulation assumes that the output of interest is a Gaussian process in some set of inputs that vary across model runs.…”
Section: Alternative Emulation Strategiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This fitting is aided by the fact that most of the input parameters appear to have little impact on the output of interest. Emulation over physical parameters that are globally constant has been done with very few model runs by exploiting the information available in a spatially resolved climate model that provides many informative outputs about these parameters from each run (Sanso et al 2008;Sanso and Forest 2009;Sham Bhat et al 2012). In contrast, for the forcing scenario emulation, we should not assume that any of the statistical parameters in our emulators Eqs.…”
Section: Alternative Emulation Strategiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this regard, the statistical model can be regarded as an emulator of an initial condition ensemble, under the assumption that runs are independent for different initial conditions. This is, to our knowledge, the first time an emulator is used in this context, as it is traditionally used for calibration and sensitivity analysis (Sansó et al, 2008;Sansó and Forest, 2009;Bhat et al, 2012;Drignei et al, 2008;Chang et al, 2015) or scenario extrapolation (Holden and Edwards, 2010;Castruccio and Stein, 2013;Holden et al, 2013;Castruccio et al, 2014). The key difference with traditional emulators is that we do not assume correlation among inputs, as different initial conditions sensibly sampled from the spin-up run generate effectively independent runs.…”
Section: Accepted Manuscriptmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Consistent with the attribution literature, ASK provides classical ("frequentist") confidence intervals -that is, ranges over which models match observations better than a given threshold for goodness-of-fit. Early implementations of FKM were also frequentist in character, while recent implementations (Sansó et al 2008;Meinshausen et al 2009) have used more explicitly Bayesian approaches, exploring sensitivities to prior distributions but still generally avoiding any claim to accurate representation of actual subjective prior beliefs. In contrast, the studies in references (Murphy et al 2004;Murphy et al 2007;) have generally aimed to provide credible intervals, or Bayesian posterior probabilities -ranges within which the forecast quantity of interest is expected to lie given both the prior expectations of the investigators and the constraints of the observations.…”
Section: Overviewmentioning
confidence: 99%