2019
DOI: 10.1029/2019sw002208
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Quantifying the Performance of Geomagnetically Induced Current Models

Abstract: We describe a metric that has been repeatedly applied to assess the performance of models aimed at predicting geomagnetically induced currents from Space Weather events. The used parameterization, based on the well‐known root‐mean‐square error between model and observations, is simple and intuitive. Its use is exemplified, and its advantages and disadvantages are discussed, as well as its relationship with the widely extended correlation coefficient, r. Although the use of r alone is inappropriate for purposes… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

3
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Note also that the 400 kV circuit line through which the greatest current flows (connecting Mudarra substation to the North-West), in fact, includes three power lines. the performance parameter, P′ (see Marsal & Torta, 2019), the former goes from 0.83 to an almost perfect correlation of 0.97; while the latter goes from 0.44 to 0.70.…”
Section: New Gic Model Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Note also that the 400 kV circuit line through which the greatest current flows (connecting Mudarra substation to the North-West), in fact, includes three power lines. the performance parameter, P′ (see Marsal & Torta, 2019), the former goes from 0.83 to an almost perfect correlation of 0.97; while the latter goes from 0.44 to 0.70.…”
Section: New Gic Model Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To evaluate the agreement between the DMM‐derived and modeled GIC, a combination of the linear correlation coefficient, ρ, and the performance parameter, P, between both time series has been used (see Marsal & Torta, 2019). P is defined as P=1σomσo, where σo is the standard deviation of the observation series (i.e., the GIC derived following the exposed methodology), and σom is the standard deviation of the differences between the observations and the model.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To evaluate the agreement between the DMM-derived and modeled GIC, a combination of the linear correlation coefficient,  E , and the performance parameter,  E P , between both time series has been used (see Marsal & Torta, 2019).  E P is defined as…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In order to numerically quantify the similarity between two ECF patterns, we have used the performance parameter defined in Marsal and Torta (2019) (see also Bailey et al, 2018; Blake et al, 2018; Ingham & Rodger, 2018; Marsal, 2015; Torta et al, 2017): P.3em=.3em1italicRMSEECFm,ECFoσitalicECFm.3em=.3em1true()ECFm.2em.2emECFo2¯italicECFm2true¯trueitalicECFm¯2,2em where ECF m and ECF o denote the two spatial functions to be compared at a given time, playing ECF m the role of model and ECF o the role of objective ; RMSE ECFm , ECFo stands for the root mean square error between them; the bar on top of a variable indicates its mean; and σ ECFm represents the standard deviation of ECF m . The RMSE is thus contextualized by the intrinsic spatial variability of the model ECF, whose role is assumed either by the pattern of step 1 or that of step 2.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%