Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

How to present results from multiple algos in paper #45

Open
jbusecke opened this issue Nov 1, 2022 · 2 comments
Open

How to present results from multiple algos in paper #45

jbusecke opened this issue Nov 1, 2022 · 2 comments

Comments

@jbusecke
Copy link
Collaborator

jbusecke commented Nov 1, 2022

@ocean-transport/collab_team Our most recent results indicate that differences between algos are very minor and thus I suggest not focussing on those front and center in the paper.

I suggest the following:

  • For maps we show the averaged values across all algos we processed (this might change slightly) + Some in detail differences for the appendix
  • For histograms we could show multiple distributions?
  • For any aggregated metrics (e.g. global small scale heatflux) we could give the mean + std/var between algos as uncertainty?

Happy to make adjustments, just wanted to start a discussion

@jbusecke
Copy link
Collaborator Author

jbusecke commented Nov 1, 2022

Here is a plot I made for the Appendix

image

Rows are latent and sensible heat flux. Columns are: (left) Small scale contribution averaged over algos; (middle) stdv between algos; (right) relative 'error' between algos with respect to the small scale contribution.

We can see that the difference between algos is not always negligible, but the high relative values are generally where the small scale contribution is small to begin with, so not that relevant to our results. Wonder how we could show that more conclusively.

@jbusecke
Copy link
Collaborator Author

jbusecke commented Nov 2, 2022

We had a good discussion of this today, and there was an alternative suggestion to use the algo that makes most sense for the model (ecmwf?) and show results from that algo (instead of averaging across them).
Either way the uncertainties would have to be discussed (in the Appendix presumably), but I would like to get @rabernat s opinion on this.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant