[Met_help] [rt.rap.ucar.edu #74306] History for Fuzzy verification methods
John Halley Gotway via RT
met_help at ucar.edu
Thu Jan 28 16:39:26 MST 2016
----------------------------------------------------------------
Initial Request
----------------------------------------------------------------
dear met-help.
I want to know what other Fuzzy verification, other than FSS is available in MET???
Geeta
----------------------------------------------------------------
Complete Ticket History
----------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Fuzzy verification methods
From: John Halley Gotway
Time: Tue Dec 08 11:10:35 2015
Geeta,
I googled "fuzzy verification methods" and found the following list:
http://www.univie.ac.at/IMG-Wien/meetings/map_d-phase/abstracts/44-
fuzzy-ebert.pdf
Of these, MET includes support for...
(1) Upscaling in the Point-Stat and Grid-Stat tools. You can specify
several interpolation methods in the config file "interp" section to
smooth
the forecast data using larger and larger interpolation widths. This
is
one way of upscaling, and you can see how the scores change the more
you
smooth the data.
(2) Fractions skill score in the Grid-Stat tool.
(3) The Wavelet-Stat tool implements the intensity-scale method by
Casati
et al.
(4) MODE, not included in this list, is an object-based verification
method.
We are not able to provide in MET all available verification methods.
We
don't have the time or funding to make that feasible. However, in the
new
work we do, we strive to make all enhancements to the MET tools
available
to the broader community.
There is active research going on in fuzzy verification methods.
Here's a
link to the MesoVict project:
http://www.ral.ucar.edu/projects/icp/
Its goal is to measure the advantages and disadvantages to the wide
range
of fuzzy verification methods in use. And the vast majority, if not
all,
of those methods are available within the "SpatialVx" package for R.
Hope that helps.
Thanks,
John Halley Gotway
------------------------------------------------
Subject: Fuzzy verification methods
From: Geeta Geeta
Time: Tue Dec 08 23:09:03 2015
Thanks John.
this is the section of interp in the config file.
/// "interp" section
interp = { field = BOTH; vld_thresh = 1.0;
type = [ { method = UW_MEAN; width = 1;
} ];};
so where I have to make changes for the threshold and
scale/Upscaling???. How I should make changes in the config file.
Geeta
> Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2015 11:10:36 -0700
>
> Geeta,
>
> I googled "fuzzy verification methods" and found the following list:
>
> http://www.univie.ac.at/IMG-Wien/meetings/map_d-phase/abstracts/44-
fuzzy-ebert.pdf
>
> Of these, MET includes support for...
>
> (1) Upscaling in the Point-Stat and Grid-Stat tools. You can
specify
> several interpolation methods in the config file "interp" section to
smooth
> the forecast data using larger and larger interpolation widths.
This is
> one way of upscaling, and you can see how the scores change the more
you
> smooth the data.
> (2) Fractions skill score in the Grid-Stat tool.
> (3) The Wavelet-Stat tool implements the intensity-scale method by
Casati
> et al.
> (4) MODE, not included in this list, is an object-based verification
method.
>
> We are not able to provide in MET all available verification
methods. We
> don't have the time or funding to make that feasible. However, in
the new
> work we do, we strive to make all enhancements to the MET tools
available
> to the broader community.
>
> There is active research going on in fuzzy verification methods.
Here's a
> link to the MesoVict project:
> http://www.ral.ucar.edu/projects/icp/
>
> Its goal is to measure the advantages and disadvantages to the wide
range
> of fuzzy verification methods in use. And the vast majority, if not
all,
> of those methods are available within the "SpatialVx" package for R.
>
> Hope that helps.
>
> Thanks,
> John Halley Gotway
>
------------------------------------------------
Subject: Fuzzy verification methods
From: John Halley Gotway
Time: Wed Dec 09 10:43:09 2015
Geeta,
To apply upscaling, I'd suggest using the following settings:
//
// Data smoothing methods
//
interp = {
field = FCST; // Only smooth the forecast field. Keep the
observations unchanged.
vld_thresh = 1.0;
type = [
{ method = UW_MEAN; width = 1; },
{ method = UW_MEAN; width = 3; },
{ method = UW_MEAN; width = 5; },
{ method = UW_MEAN; width = 6; },
{ method = UW_MEAN; width = 9; },
{ method = UW_MEAN; width = 11; },
{ method = UW_MEAN; width = 13; }
];
}
This will smooth the forecast field using larger and larger smoothing
areas. Then, you could look at the resulting statistics and see how
they
change as you apply more smoothing.
Thanks,
John
On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 11:09 PM, Geeta Geeta via RT
<met_help at ucar.edu>
wrote:
>
> <URL: https://rt.rap.ucar.edu/rt/Ticket/Display.html?id=74306 >
>
>
>
>
> Thanks John.
> this is the section of interp in the config file.
>
>
> /// "interp" section
> interp = { field = BOTH; vld_thresh = 1.0;
> type = [ { method = UW_MEAN; width = 1;
}
> ];};
> so where I have to make changes for the threshold and
scale/Upscaling???.
> How I should make changes in the config file.
> Geeta
>
>
> > Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2015 11:10:36 -0700
> >
> > Geeta,
> >
> > I googled "fuzzy verification methods" and found the following
list:
> >
> >
> http://www.univie.ac.at/IMG-Wien/meetings/map_d-phase/abstracts/44-
fuzzy-ebert.pdf
> >
> > Of these, MET includes support for...
> >
> > (1) Upscaling in the Point-Stat and Grid-Stat tools. You can
specify
> > several interpolation methods in the config file "interp" section
to
> smooth
> > the forecast data using larger and larger interpolation widths.
This is
> > one way of upscaling, and you can see how the scores change the
more you
> > smooth the data.
> > (2) Fractions skill score in the Grid-Stat tool.
> > (3) The Wavelet-Stat tool implements the intensity-scale method by
Casati
> > et al.
> > (4) MODE, not included in this list, is an object-based
verification
> method.
> >
> > We are not able to provide in MET all available verification
methods. We
> > don't have the time or funding to make that feasible. However, in
the
> new
> > work we do, we strive to make all enhancements to the MET tools
available
> > to the broader community.
> >
> > There is active research going on in fuzzy verification methods.
Here's
> a
> > link to the MesoVict project:
> > http://www.ral.ucar.edu/projects/icp/
> >
> > Its goal is to measure the advantages and disadvantages to the
wide range
> > of fuzzy verification methods in use. And the vast majority, if
not all,
> > of those methods are available within the "SpatialVx" package for
R.
> >
> > Hope that helps.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > John Halley Gotway
> >
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------
Subject: Fuzzy verification methods
From: Geeta Geeta
Time: Mon Dec 14 08:56:02 2015
Hi john.
I tried this and there was a change in ctc file.
Will the r scirpt for fss work for seeing change in ets as a function
of neighbour ood size
Geeta
Sent from my Windows Phone
________________________________
From: John Halley Gotway via RT<mailto:met_help at ucar.edu>
Sent: 09-12-2015 23:13
To: geeta124 at hotmail.com<mailto:geeta124 at hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [rt.rap.ucar.edu #74306] Fuzzy verification methods
Geeta,
To apply upscaling, I'd suggest using the following settings:
//
// Data smoothing methods
//
interp = {
field = FCST; // Only smooth the forecast field. Keep the
observations unchanged.
vld_thresh = 1.0;
type = [
{ method = UW_MEAN; width = 1; },
{ method = UW_MEAN; width = 3; },
{ method = UW_MEAN; width = 5; },
{ method = UW_MEAN; width = 6; },
{ method = UW_MEAN; width = 9; },
{ method = UW_MEAN; width = 11; },
{ method = UW_MEAN; width = 13; }
];
}
This will smooth the forecast field using larger and larger smoothing
areas. Then, you could look at the resulting statistics and see how
they
change as you apply more smoothing.
Thanks,
John
On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 11:09 PM, Geeta Geeta via RT
<met_help at ucar.edu>
wrote:
>
> <URL: https://rt.rap.ucar.edu/rt/Ticket/Display.html?id=74306 >
>
>
>
>
> Thanks John.
> this is the section of interp in the config file.
>
>
> /// "interp" section
> interp = { field = BOTH; vld_thresh = 1.0;
> type = [ { method = UW_MEAN; width = 1;
}
> ];};
> so where I have to make changes for the threshold and
scale/Upscaling???.
> How I should make changes in the config file.
> Geeta
>
>
> > Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2015 11:10:36 -0700
> >
> > Geeta,
> >
> > I googled "fuzzy verification methods" and found the following
list:
> >
> >
> http://www.univie.ac.at/IMG-Wien/meetings/map_d-phase/abstracts/44-
fuzzy-ebert.pdf
> >
> > Of these, MET includes support for...
> >
> > (1) Upscaling in the Point-Stat and Grid-Stat tools. You can
specify
> > several interpolation methods in the config file "interp" section
to
> smooth
> > the forecast data using larger and larger interpolation widths.
This is
> > one way of upscaling, and you can see how the scores change the
more you
> > smooth the data.
> > (2) Fractions skill score in the Grid-Stat tool.
> > (3) The Wavelet-Stat tool implements the intensity-scale method by
Casati
> > et al.
> > (4) MODE, not included in this list, is an object-based
verification
> method.
> >
> > We are not able to provide in MET all available verification
methods. We
> > don't have the time or funding to make that feasible. However, in
the
> new
> > work we do, we strive to make all enhancements to the MET tools
available
> > to the broader community.
> >
> > There is active research going on in fuzzy verification methods.
Here's
> a
> > link to the MesoVict project:
> > http://www.ral.ucar.edu/projects/icp/
> >
> > Its goal is to measure the advantages and disadvantages to the
wide range
> > of fuzzy verification methods in use. And the vast majority, if
not all,
> > of those methods are available within the "SpatialVx" package for
R.
> >
> > Hope that helps.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > John Halley Gotway
> >
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------
Subject: Fuzzy verification methods
From: John Halley Gotway
Time: Mon Dec 14 09:33:00 2015
Geeta,
My guess is no, I don't think the Rscript for plotting FSS would work,
as
is, to plot statistics as a function of the interpolation width. That
Rscript reads data from the "NBRCNT" line type, which contains the FSS
values.
However, one could adapt it to read other MET line types and plot
other
statistics.
John
On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 8:56 AM, Geeta Geeta via RT
<met_help at ucar.edu>
wrote:
>
> <URL: https://rt.rap.ucar.edu/rt/Ticket/Display.html?id=74306 >
>
> Hi john.
> I tried this and there was a change in ctc file.
> Will the r scirpt for fss work for seeing change in ets as a
function of
> neighbour ood size
> Geeta
>
> Sent from my Windows Phone
> ________________________________
> From: John Halley Gotway via RT<mailto:met_help at ucar.edu>
> Sent: 09-12-2015 23:13
> To: geeta124 at hotmail.com<mailto:geeta124 at hotmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [rt.rap.ucar.edu #74306] Fuzzy verification methods
>
> Geeta,
>
> To apply upscaling, I'd suggest using the following settings:
>
> //
> // Data smoothing methods
> //
> interp = {
> field = FCST; // Only smooth the forecast field. Keep
the
> observations unchanged.
> vld_thresh = 1.0;
>
> type = [
> { method = UW_MEAN; width = 1; },
> { method = UW_MEAN; width = 3; },
> { method = UW_MEAN; width = 5; },
> { method = UW_MEAN; width = 6; },
> { method = UW_MEAN; width = 9; },
> { method = UW_MEAN; width = 11; },
> { method = UW_MEAN; width = 13; }
> ];
> }
>
>
> This will smooth the forecast field using larger and larger
smoothing
> areas. Then, you could look at the resulting statistics and see how
they
> change as you apply more smoothing.
>
> Thanks,
> John
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 11:09 PM, Geeta Geeta via RT
<met_help at ucar.edu>
> wrote:
>
> >
> > <URL: https://rt.rap.ucar.edu/rt/Ticket/Display.html?id=74306 >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks John.
> > this is the section of interp in the config file.
> >
> >
> > /// "interp" section
> > interp = { field = BOTH; vld_thresh = 1.0;
> > type = [ { method = UW_MEAN; width = 1;
}
> > ];};
> > so where I have to make changes for the threshold and
scale/Upscaling???.
> > How I should make changes in the config file.
> > Geeta
> >
> >
> > > Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2015 11:10:36 -0700
> > >
> > > Geeta,
> > >
> > > I googled "fuzzy verification methods" and found the following
list:
> > >
> > >
> >
> http://www.univie.ac.at/IMG-Wien/meetings/map_d-phase/abstracts/44-
fuzzy-ebert.pdf
> > >
> > > Of these, MET includes support for...
> > >
> > > (1) Upscaling in the Point-Stat and Grid-Stat tools. You can
specify
> > > several interpolation methods in the config file "interp"
section to
> > smooth
> > > the forecast data using larger and larger interpolation widths.
This
> is
> > > one way of upscaling, and you can see how the scores change the
more
> you
> > > smooth the data.
> > > (2) Fractions skill score in the Grid-Stat tool.
> > > (3) The Wavelet-Stat tool implements the intensity-scale method
by
> Casati
> > > et al.
> > > (4) MODE, not included in this list, is an object-based
verification
> > method.
> > >
> > > We are not able to provide in MET all available verification
methods.
> We
> > > don't have the time or funding to make that feasible. However,
in the
> > new
> > > work we do, we strive to make all enhancements to the MET tools
> available
> > > to the broader community.
> > >
> > > There is active research going on in fuzzy verification methods.
> Here's
> > a
> > > link to the MesoVict project:
> > > http://www.ral.ucar.edu/projects/icp/
> > >
> > > Its goal is to measure the advantages and disadvantages to the
wide
> range
> > > of fuzzy verification methods in use. And the vast majority, if
not
> all,
> > > of those methods are available within the "SpatialVx" package
for R.
> > >
> > > Hope that helps.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > John Halley Gotway
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------
Subject: Fuzzy verification methods
From: Geeta Geeta
Time: Tue Dec 15 09:25:24 2015
hi john. i am not familiar with R. can u help me with this script???
geeta
> Subject: Re: [rt.rap.ucar.edu #74306] Fuzzy verification methods
> From: met_help at ucar.edu
> To: geeta124 at hotmail.com
> Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2015 09:33:01 -0700
>
> Geeta,
>
> My guess is no, I don't think the Rscript for plotting FSS would
work, as
> is, to plot statistics as a function of the interpolation width.
That
> Rscript reads data from the "NBRCNT" line type, which contains the
FSS
> values.
>
> However, one could adapt it to read other MET line types and plot
other
> statistics.
>
> John
>
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 8:56 AM, Geeta Geeta via RT
<met_help at ucar.edu>
> wrote:
>
> >
> > <URL: https://rt.rap.ucar.edu/rt/Ticket/Display.html?id=74306 >
> >
> > Hi john.
> > I tried this and there was a change in ctc file.
> > Will the r scirpt for fss work for seeing change in ets as a
function of
> > neighbour ood size
> > Geeta
> >
> > Sent from my Windows Phone
> > ________________________________
> > From: John Halley Gotway via RT<mailto:met_help at ucar.edu>
> > Sent: 09-12-2015 23:13
> > To: geeta124 at hotmail.com<mailto:geeta124 at hotmail.com>
> > Subject: Re: [rt.rap.ucar.edu #74306] Fuzzy verification methods
> >
> > Geeta,
> >
> > To apply upscaling, I'd suggest using the following settings:
> >
> > //
> > // Data smoothing methods
> > //
> > interp = {
> > field = FCST; // Only smooth the forecast field. Keep
the
> > observations unchanged.
> > vld_thresh = 1.0;
> >
> > type = [
> > { method = UW_MEAN; width = 1; },
> > { method = UW_MEAN; width = 3; },
> > { method = UW_MEAN; width = 5; },
> > { method = UW_MEAN; width = 6; },
> > { method = UW_MEAN; width = 9; },
> > { method = UW_MEAN; width = 11; },
> > { method = UW_MEAN; width = 13; }
> > ];
> > }
> >
> >
> > This will smooth the forecast field using larger and larger
smoothing
> > areas. Then, you could look at the resulting statistics and see
how they
> > change as you apply more smoothing.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > John
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 11:09 PM, Geeta Geeta via RT
<met_help at ucar.edu>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > <URL: https://rt.rap.ucar.edu/rt/Ticket/Display.html?id=74306 >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks John.
> > > this is the section of interp in the config file.
> > >
> > >
> > > /// "interp" section
> > > interp = { field = BOTH; vld_thresh = 1.0;
> > > type = [ { method = UW_MEAN; width = 1;
}
> > > ];};
> > > so where I have to make changes for the threshold and
scale/Upscaling???.
> > > How I should make changes in the config file.
> > > Geeta
> > >
> > >
> > > > Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2015 11:10:36 -0700
> > > >
> > > > Geeta,
> > > >
> > > > I googled "fuzzy verification methods" and found the following
list:
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > http://www.univie.ac.at/IMG-Wien/meetings/map_d-
phase/abstracts/44-fuzzy-ebert.pdf
> > > >
> > > > Of these, MET includes support for...
> > > >
> > > > (1) Upscaling in the Point-Stat and Grid-Stat tools. You can
specify
> > > > several interpolation methods in the config file "interp"
section to
> > > smooth
> > > > the forecast data using larger and larger interpolation
widths. This
> > is
> > > > one way of upscaling, and you can see how the scores change
the more
> > you
> > > > smooth the data.
> > > > (2) Fractions skill score in the Grid-Stat tool.
> > > > (3) The Wavelet-Stat tool implements the intensity-scale
method by
> > Casati
> > > > et al.
> > > > (4) MODE, not included in this list, is an object-based
verification
> > > method.
> > > >
> > > > We are not able to provide in MET all available verification
methods.
> > We
> > > > don't have the time or funding to make that feasible.
However, in the
> > > new
> > > > work we do, we strive to make all enhancements to the MET
tools
> > available
> > > > to the broader community.
> > > >
> > > > There is active research going on in fuzzy verification
methods.
> > Here's
> > > a
> > > > link to the MesoVict project:
> > > > http://www.ral.ucar.edu/projects/icp/
> > > >
> > > > Its goal is to measure the advantages and disadvantages to the
wide
> > range
> > > > of fuzzy verification methods in use. And the vast majority,
if not
> > all,
> > > > of those methods are available within the "SpatialVx" package
for R.
> > > >
> > > > Hope that helps.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > John Halley Gotway
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
------------------------------------------------
Subject: Fuzzy verification methods
From: John Halley Gotway
Time: Wed Dec 16 09:57:53 2015
Geeta,
I'm sorry, but no, I'm not able to. We have very limited funding for
providing support for the MET software and this is beyond the scope of
the
MET software.
John
On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 9:25 AM, Geeta Geeta via RT
<met_help at ucar.edu>
wrote:
>
> <URL: https://rt.rap.ucar.edu/rt/Ticket/Display.html?id=74306 >
>
> hi john. i am not familiar with R. can u help me with this script???
> geeta
>
> > Subject: Re: [rt.rap.ucar.edu #74306] Fuzzy verification methods
> > From: met_help at ucar.edu
> > To: geeta124 at hotmail.com
> > Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2015 09:33:01 -0700
> >
> > Geeta,
> >
> > My guess is no, I don't think the Rscript for plotting FSS would
work, as
> > is, to plot statistics as a function of the interpolation width.
That
> > Rscript reads data from the "NBRCNT" line type, which contains the
FSS
> > values.
> >
> > However, one could adapt it to read other MET line types and plot
other
> > statistics.
> >
> > John
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 8:56 AM, Geeta Geeta via RT
<met_help at ucar.edu>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > <URL: https://rt.rap.ucar.edu/rt/Ticket/Display.html?id=74306 >
> > >
> > > Hi john.
> > > I tried this and there was a change in ctc file.
> > > Will the r scirpt for fss work for seeing change in ets as a
function
> of
> > > neighbour ood size
> > > Geeta
> > >
> > > Sent from my Windows Phone
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: John Halley Gotway via RT<mailto:met_help at ucar.edu>
> > > Sent: 09-12-2015 23:13
> > > To: geeta124 at hotmail.com<mailto:geeta124 at hotmail.com>
> > > Subject: Re: [rt.rap.ucar.edu #74306] Fuzzy verification methods
> > >
> > > Geeta,
> > >
> > > To apply upscaling, I'd suggest using the following settings:
> > >
> > > //
> > > // Data smoothing methods
> > > //
> > > interp = {
> > > field = FCST; // Only smooth the forecast field.
Keep the
> > > observations unchanged.
> > > vld_thresh = 1.0;
> > >
> > > type = [
> > > { method = UW_MEAN; width = 1; },
> > > { method = UW_MEAN; width = 3; },
> > > { method = UW_MEAN; width = 5; },
> > > { method = UW_MEAN; width = 6; },
> > > { method = UW_MEAN; width = 9; },
> > > { method = UW_MEAN; width = 11; },
> > > { method = UW_MEAN; width = 13; }
> > > ];
> > > }
> > >
> > >
> > > This will smooth the forecast field using larger and larger
smoothing
> > > areas. Then, you could look at the resulting statistics and see
how
> they
> > > change as you apply more smoothing.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > John
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 11:09 PM, Geeta Geeta via RT
<met_help at ucar.edu
> >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > <URL: https://rt.rap.ucar.edu/rt/Ticket/Display.html?id=74306
>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thanks John.
> > > > this is the section of interp in the config file.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > /// "interp" section
> > > > interp = { field = BOTH; vld_thresh = 1.0;
> > > > type = [ { method = UW_MEAN; width =
1;
> }
> > > > ];};
> > > > so where I have to make changes for the threshold and
> scale/Upscaling???.
> > > > How I should make changes in the config file.
> > > > Geeta
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2015 11:10:36 -0700
> > > > >
> > > > > Geeta,
> > > > >
> > > > > I googled "fuzzy verification methods" and found the
following
> list:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> http://www.univie.ac.at/IMG-Wien/meetings/map_d-phase/abstracts/44-
fuzzy-ebert.pdf
> > > > >
> > > > > Of these, MET includes support for...
> > > > >
> > > > > (1) Upscaling in the Point-Stat and Grid-Stat tools. You
can
> specify
> > > > > several interpolation methods in the config file "interp"
section
> to
> > > > smooth
> > > > > the forecast data using larger and larger interpolation
widths.
> This
> > > is
> > > > > one way of upscaling, and you can see how the scores change
the
> more
> > > you
> > > > > smooth the data.
> > > > > (2) Fractions skill score in the Grid-Stat tool.
> > > > > (3) The Wavelet-Stat tool implements the intensity-scale
method by
> > > Casati
> > > > > et al.
> > > > > (4) MODE, not included in this list, is an object-based
> verification
> > > > method.
> > > > >
> > > > > We are not able to provide in MET all available verification
> methods.
> > > We
> > > > > don't have the time or funding to make that feasible.
However, in
> the
> > > > new
> > > > > work we do, we strive to make all enhancements to the MET
tools
> > > available
> > > > > to the broader community.
> > > > >
> > > > > There is active research going on in fuzzy verification
methods.
> > > Here's
> > > > a
> > > > > link to the MesoVict project:
> > > > > http://www.ral.ucar.edu/projects/icp/
> > > > >
> > > > > Its goal is to measure the advantages and disadvantages to
the wide
> > > range
> > > > > of fuzzy verification methods in use. And the vast
majority, if
> not
> > > all,
> > > > > of those methods are available within the "SpatialVx"
package for
> R.
> > > > >
> > > > > Hope that helps.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > John Halley Gotway
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
------------------------------------------------
Subject: Fuzzy verification methods
From: Geeta Geeta
Time: Thu Jan 28 08:49:31 2016
Hi John. I still have some doubt regarding "Upscaling".
I have defined different thresholds (for rainfall) in below sections
of the Configuration file. fcst = { wind_thresh = [ NA ];
field = [ { name = "APCP_24"; level =
[ "(*,*)" ]; cat_thresh = [ >=0.1,
>=2.4,>=7.5,>=15.6,>=25.6,>=35.6,>=45.6,>=55.6,>=64.5,>=124.5]; }
];
};obs = { wind_thresh = [ NA ];
field = [ { name = "APCP_24"; level =
[ "(*,*)" ]; cat_thresh = [ >=0.1,
>=2.4,>=7.5,>=15.6,>=25.6,>=35.6,>=45.6,>=55.6,>=64.5,>=124.5]; }
];
interp = { field = FCST; // if BOTH then both will be upscaled
vld_thresh = 1.0;
type = [ { method = UW_MEAN; width = 1;
}, { method = UW_MEAN; width = 3; },
{ method = UW_MEAN; width = 5; }; ];};
I want to know the procedure followed by grid_stat tool of MET to do
UPSCALING. What I mean is that both the OBS and FCST fields are
converted to binary fields (depending on the threshold) and then more
number of grid points are incorporated and then ETS is calculated??. I
mean are the binary fields averaged???.
Kindly clarify.
Geeta
> Subject: Re: [rt.rap.ucar.edu #74306] Fuzzy verification methods
> From: met_help at ucar.edu
> To: geeta124 at hotmail.com
> Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2015 10:43:09 -0700
>
> Geeta,
>
> To apply upscaling, I'd suggest using the following settings:
>
> //
> // Data smoothing methods
> //
> interp = {
> field = FCST; // Only smooth the forecast field. Keep
the
> observations unchanged.
> vld_thresh = 1.0;
>
> type = [
> { method = UW_MEAN; width = 1; },
> { method = UW_MEAN; width = 3; },
> { method = UW_MEAN; width = 5; },
> { method = UW_MEAN; width = 6; },
> { method = UW_MEAN; width = 9; },
> { method = UW_MEAN; width = 11; },
> { method = UW_MEAN; width = 13; }
> ];
> }
>
>
> This will smooth the forecast field using larger and larger
smoothing
> areas. Then, you could look at the resulting statistics and see how
they
> change as you apply more smoothing.
>
> Thanks,
> John
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 11:09 PM, Geeta Geeta via RT
<met_help at ucar.edu>
> wrote:
>
> >
> > <URL: https://rt.rap.ucar.edu/rt/Ticket/Display.html?id=74306 >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks John.
> > this is the section of interp in the config file.
> >
> >
> > /// "interp" section
> > interp = { field = BOTH; vld_thresh = 1.0;
> > type = [ { method = UW_MEAN; width = 1;
}
> > ];};
> > so where I have to make changes for the threshold and
scale/Upscaling???.
> > How I should make changes in the config file.
> > Geeta
> >
> >
> > > Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2015 11:10:36 -0700
> > >
> > > Geeta,
> > >
> > > I googled "fuzzy verification methods" and found the following
list:
> > >
> > >
> > http://www.univie.ac.at/IMG-Wien/meetings/map_d-
phase/abstracts/44-fuzzy-ebert.pdf
> > >
> > > Of these, MET includes support for...
> > >
> > > (1) Upscaling in the Point-Stat and Grid-Stat tools. You can
specify
> > > several interpolation methods in the config file "interp"
section to
> > smooth
> > > the forecast data using larger and larger interpolation widths.
This is
> > > one way of upscaling, and you can see how the scores change the
more you
> > > smooth the data.
> > > (2) Fractions skill score in the Grid-Stat tool.
> > > (3) The Wavelet-Stat tool implements the intensity-scale method
by Casati
> > > et al.
> > > (4) MODE, not included in this list, is an object-based
verification
> > method.
> > >
> > > We are not able to provide in MET all available verification
methods. We
> > > don't have the time or funding to make that feasible. However,
in the
> > new
> > > work we do, we strive to make all enhancements to the MET tools
available
> > > to the broader community.
> > >
> > > There is active research going on in fuzzy verification methods.
Here's
> > a
> > > link to the MesoVict project:
> > > http://www.ral.ucar.edu/projects/icp/
> > >
> > > Its goal is to measure the advantages and disadvantages to the
wide range
> > > of fuzzy verification methods in use. And the vast majority, if
not all,
> > > of those methods are available within the "SpatialVx" package
for R.
> > >
> > > Hope that helps.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > John Halley Gotway
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
------------------------------------------------
More information about the Met_help
mailing list