-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
/
3.4.2.html
68 lines (65 loc) · 4.32 KB
/
3.4.2.html
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="sst_review_style.css">
<title>3.4.2 Large-scale Sampling Uncertainty</title>
</head>
<body>
<div class="row">
<div class="column side">
<p></p>
</div>
<div class="column middle">
<p>
<a href="3.4.1.html">Previous - 3.4.1 Grid-box Sampling Uncertainty</a>
<a href="index.html">Index</a>
<a href="3.4.3.html">Next - 3.4.3 Summary of Sampling Uncertainty</a>
</p>
<h1>3.4.2 Large-scale Sampling Uncertainty</h1>
<p>
Because Rayner et al. [2006] and Kennedy et al. [2011b] make no attempt to estimate temperatures in grid boxes which contain no observations, an additional uncertainty had to be computed when estimating area-averages. Rayner et al. [2006] used Optimal Averaging (OA) as described in Folland et al. [2001] which estimates the area average in a statistically optimal way and provides an estimate of the large-scale sampling uncertainty. Kennedy et al. [2011b] subsampled globally complete fields taken from three SST analyses and obtained similar uncertainties from each. The uncertainties of the global averages computed by Kennedy et al. [2011b] were generally larger than those estimated by Rayner et al. [2006]. Palmer and Brohan [2011] used an empirical method based on that employed for grid-box averages in Rayner et al. [2006] to estimate global and ocean basin averages of subsurface temperatures.
</p><p>
The Kennedy et al. [2011b] large-scale sampling uncertainty of the global average SST
anomaly is largest (with a 2-sigma uncertainty of around 0.15K) in the 1860s when
coverage was at its worst (Figure 8). This falls to 0.03K by 2006. The fact that the
large-scale sampling uncertainty should be so small particularly in the nineteenth
century may be surprising. The relatively small uncertainty might simply be a
reflection of the assumptions made in the analyses used by Kennedy et al. [2011b] to
estimate the large-scale sampling uncertainty. Indeed, Gouretski et al. [2012] found
that subsampling an ocean reanalysis underestimated the uncertainty when the coverage
was very sparse. However, estimates made by Jones [1994] suggest that a
hemispheric-average land-surface air temperature series might be constructed using as
few as a 109 stations. For SST, the variability is typically much lower than for land
temperatures though the area is larger. It seems likely that the number of stations
needed to make a reliable estimate of the global average SST anomaly would not be vastly
greater.
</p><p>
Another way of assessing the large-scale sampling uncertainty is to look at the effect
of reducing the coverage of well-sampled periods to that of the less-well-sampled
nineteenth century and recomputing the global average (see for example Parker [1987]).
Figure 4 shows the range of global annual average SST anomalies obtained by reducing
each year to the coverage of years in the nineteenth century. So, for example, the
range indicated by the blue area in the upper panel for 2006 shows the range of global
annual averages obtained by reducing the coverage of 2006 successively to that of 1850,
1851, 1852... and so on to 1899. The red line shows the global average SST anomaly
from data that have not been reduced in coverage. For most years, the difference between
the sub-sampled and more fully sampled data is smaller than 0.15K and the largest
deviations are smaller than 0.2K. For the large-scale sampling uncertainty of the global
average to be significantly larger would require the variability in the nineteenth
century data gaps to be different from that in the better-observed period.
</p>
<p>
<img src="http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadsst3/uncertainty_review/Figure_4.png">
</p><p>
<i><b>Figure 4</b>: (a) Estimated global average SST anomaly from HadSST3 [Kennedy et al. 2011b, 2011c] (red) and for subsamples of the HadSST3 dataset reduced to 19th century coverage. The black line is the median of the samples and the blue area gives the range. (b) difference, on an expanded temperature scale, between the global average SST anomaly from the full HadSST3 data set and global averages calculated from the subsamples.</i>
</p>
<p>
<a href="3.4.1.html">Previous - 3.4.1 Grid-box Sampling Uncertainty</a>
<a href="index.html">Index</a>
<a href="3.4.3.html">Next - 3.4.3 Summary of Sampling Uncertainty</a>
</p>
<br><br><br><br>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>