Journal
SIAM-ASA JOURNAL ON UNCERTAINTY QUANTIFICATION
Volume 1, Issue 1, Pages 522-534Publisher
SIAM PUBLICATIONS
DOI: 10.1137/130907550
Keywords
climate model; CMIP3; Hellinger distance; integrated quadratic distance; Kullback-Leibler diver-gence; model validation; proper scoring rule; temperature extremes
Funding
- sfi<SUP>2</SUP>, Statistics for Innovation in Oslo
- European Union's Seventh Framework Programme [290976]
Ask authors/readers for more resources
It has been argued persuasively that, in order to evaluate climate models, the probability distributions of model output need to be compared to the corresponding empirical distributions of observed data. Distance measures between probability distributions, also called divergence functions, can be used for this purpose. We contend that divergence functions ought to be proper, in the sense that acting on modelers' true beliefs is an optimal strategy. The score divergences introduced in this paper derive from proper scoring rules and, thus, they are proper with the integrated quadratic distance and the Kullback-Leibler divergence being particularly attractive choices. Other commonly used divergences fail to be proper. In an illustration, we evaluate and rank simulations from 15 climate models for temperature extremes in a comparison to reanalysis data.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available