使用简单模型的气候敏感性估计的贝叶斯解构:隐含先验和逆的混淆

J. Annan, J. Hargreaves
{"title":"使用简单模型的气候敏感性估计的贝叶斯解构:隐含先验和逆的混淆","authors":"J. Annan, J. Hargreaves","doi":"10.5194/ESD-11-347-2020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. Observational constraints on the equilibrium climate sensitivity have been generated in a variety of ways, but a number of results have been calculated which appear to be based on somewhat informal heuristics. In this paper we demonstrate that many of these estimates can be reinterpreted within the standard subjective Bayesian framework in which a prior over the uncertain parameters is updated through a likelihood arising from observational evidence. We consider cases drawn from paleoclimate research, analyses of the historical warming record, and feedback analysis based on the regression of annual radiation balance observations for temperature. In each of these cases, the prior which was (under this new interpretation) implicitly used exhibits some unconventional and possibly undesirable properties. We present alternative calculations which use the same observational information to update a range of explicitly presented priors. Our calculations suggest that heuristic methods often generate reasonable results in that they agree fairly well with the explicitly Bayesian approach using a reasonable prior. However, we also find some significant differences and argue that the explicitly Bayesian approach is preferred, as it both clarifies the role of the prior and allows researchers to transparently test the sensitivity of their results to it.","PeriodicalId":11466,"journal":{"name":"Earth System Dynamics Discussions","volume":"29 1","pages":"347-356"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bayesian deconstruction of climate sensitivity estimates using simple models: implicit priors and the confusion of the inverse\",\"authors\":\"J. Annan, J. Hargreaves\",\"doi\":\"10.5194/ESD-11-347-2020\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract. Observational constraints on the equilibrium climate sensitivity have been generated in a variety of ways, but a number of results have been calculated which appear to be based on somewhat informal heuristics. In this paper we demonstrate that many of these estimates can be reinterpreted within the standard subjective Bayesian framework in which a prior over the uncertain parameters is updated through a likelihood arising from observational evidence. We consider cases drawn from paleoclimate research, analyses of the historical warming record, and feedback analysis based on the regression of annual radiation balance observations for temperature. In each of these cases, the prior which was (under this new interpretation) implicitly used exhibits some unconventional and possibly undesirable properties. We present alternative calculations which use the same observational information to update a range of explicitly presented priors. Our calculations suggest that heuristic methods often generate reasonable results in that they agree fairly well with the explicitly Bayesian approach using a reasonable prior. However, we also find some significant differences and argue that the explicitly Bayesian approach is preferred, as it both clarifies the role of the prior and allows researchers to transparently test the sensitivity of their results to it.\",\"PeriodicalId\":11466,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Earth System Dynamics Discussions\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"347-356\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-04-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Earth System Dynamics Discussions\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5194/ESD-11-347-2020\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Earth System Dynamics Discussions","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5194/ESD-11-347-2020","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

摘要对平衡气候敏感性的观测约束已以各种方式产生,但已计算出一些结果,这些结果似乎是基于某种非正式的启发式。在本文中,我们证明了许多这些估计可以在标准的主观贝叶斯框架内重新解释,其中不确定参数的先验通过观测证据产生的可能性更新。我们考虑了来自古气候研究、历史变暖记录分析和基于年辐射平衡观测回归的反馈分析的案例。在每种情况下,隐含使用的先验(在这种新的解释下)都表现出一些非常规的和可能不受欢迎的性质。我们提出了使用相同的观测信息来更新一系列明确提出的先验的替代计算。我们的计算表明,启发式方法通常会产生合理的结果,因为它们与使用合理先验的显式贝叶斯方法相当一致。然而,我们也发现了一些显著的差异,并认为明确的贝叶斯方法是首选的,因为它既澄清了先验的作用,又允许研究人员透明地测试他们的结果对它的敏感性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Bayesian deconstruction of climate sensitivity estimates using simple models: implicit priors and the confusion of the inverse
Abstract. Observational constraints on the equilibrium climate sensitivity have been generated in a variety of ways, but a number of results have been calculated which appear to be based on somewhat informal heuristics. In this paper we demonstrate that many of these estimates can be reinterpreted within the standard subjective Bayesian framework in which a prior over the uncertain parameters is updated through a likelihood arising from observational evidence. We consider cases drawn from paleoclimate research, analyses of the historical warming record, and feedback analysis based on the regression of annual radiation balance observations for temperature. In each of these cases, the prior which was (under this new interpretation) implicitly used exhibits some unconventional and possibly undesirable properties. We present alternative calculations which use the same observational information to update a range of explicitly presented priors. Our calculations suggest that heuristic methods often generate reasonable results in that they agree fairly well with the explicitly Bayesian approach using a reasonable prior. However, we also find some significant differences and argue that the explicitly Bayesian approach is preferred, as it both clarifies the role of the prior and allows researchers to transparently test the sensitivity of their results to it.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信