On the appropriate and inappropriate uses of probability distributions in climate projections and some alternatives

On the appropriate and inappropriate uses of probability distributions in climate projections and some alternatives
复制标题

关于气候预测和一些替代方案中概率分布的适当和不适当使用

DOI:
10.1007/s10584-021-03267-x
复制
发表时间:
2021
期刊:
影响因子:
4.8
通讯作者:
Katzav J
Katzav J
中科院分区:
环境科学与生态学2区
文献类型:
--
作者:
Katzav J

文献摘要

参考文献

被引文献

相似文献

关于未来气候的概率分布函数(PDF)何时会歪曲不确定性?我们如何识别这种错误陈述何时发生,从而在推理或传达我们的不确定性时避免它?当我们不应该使用PDF时,我们应该做什么?在本文中,我们解决这三个问题。我们首先提供了一个不确定性类型的分类,并使用这种分类来说明PDF在某种程度上歪曲了我们的不确定性,可能会对决策产生不利影响。然后,我们讨论什么时候使用PDF来推理或传达气候的不确定性是合理和适当的。我们考虑这一问题的两个观点。在一个,我们认为是可取的,现有的理论和证据在气候科学基本上排除使用PDF来代表我们的不确定性。另一方面,如果依靠适当的专家判断和对相关风险的认识,可以合法地提供PDF。一旦我们明确了PDF的适当和不适当使用之间的界限,我们就会探索它们的替代用途。我们简要介绍了两个正式的替代品,即不精确的概率和可能性分布函数,以及非正式的可能性替代品。我们认为,可能性的替代方案是可取的。
When do probability distribution functions (PDFs) about future climate misrepresent uncertainty? How can we recognise when such misrepresentation occurs and thus avoid it in reasoning about or communicating our uncertainty? And when we should not use a PDF, what should we do instead? In this paper, we address these three questions. We start by providing a classification of types of uncertainty and using this classification to illustrate when PDFs misrepresent our uncertainty in a way that may adversely affect decisions. We then discuss when it is reasonable and appropriate to use a PDF to reason about or communicate uncertainty about climate. We consider two perspectives on this issue. On one, which we argue is preferable, available theory and evidence in climate science basically exclude using PDFs to represent our uncertainty. On the other, PDFs can legitimately be provided when resting on appropriate expert judgement and recognition of associated risks. Once we have specified the border between appropriate and inappropriate uses of PDFs, we explore alternatives to their use. We briefly describe two formal alternatives, namely imprecise probabilities and possibilistic distribution functions, as well as informal possibilistic alternatives. We suggest that the possibilistic alternatives are preferable.
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-021-23771-z
发表时间: 2021-07-16
影响因子: 16.6
作者:
Risbey JS;Squire DT;Black AS;DelSole T;Lepore C;Matear RJ;Monselesan DP;Moore TS;Richardson D;Schepen A;Tippett MK;Tozer CR
通讯作者: Tozer CR
逃离模型之地
DOI: 10.5018/economics-ejournal.ja.2019-40
发表时间: 2019
期刊: Economics
影响因子: --
作者:
Thompson E
通讯作者: Thompson E
气候研究中知识和无知的来源
DOI: 10.1007/s10584-011-0186-6
发表时间: 2011
期刊: Climatic Change
影响因子: 4.8
作者:
J. Risbey;T. O’Kane
通讯作者: T. O’Kane
DOI: 10.1007/s13194-017-0180-6
发表时间: 2018-01-01
影响因子: 1.5
作者:
Parker, Wendy S.;Winsberg, Eric
通讯作者: Winsberg, Eric
DOI: 10.5194/gmd-10-3207-2017
发表时间: 2017-09
影响因子: 5.1
作者:
G. Schmidt;D. Bader;L. Donner;G. Elsaesser;J. Golaz;C. Hannay;A. Molod;R. Neale;S. Saha
通讯作者: G. Schmidt;D. Bader;L. Donner;G. Elsaesser;J. Golaz;C. Hannay;A. Molod;R. Neale;S. Saha