Articles | Volume 8, issue 1
https://doi.org/10.5194/ascmo-8-97-2022
© Author(s) 2022. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/ascmo-8-97-2022
© Author(s) 2022. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Comparing climate time series – Part 3: Discriminant analysis
Department of Atmospheric, Oceanic, and Earth Sciences, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia 22030, USA
Michael K. Tippett
Department of Applied Physics and Applied Mathematics, Columbia University, New York, New York 10027, USA
Related authors
Timothy DelSole and Michael K. Tippett
Adv. Stat. Clim. Meteorol. Oceanogr., 10, 1–27, https://doi.org/10.5194/ascmo-10-1-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/ascmo-10-1-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This paper introduces a method to assess whether two data sets come from the same source. Current methods do not adequately consider spatial and temporal correlations and their annual cycles in a comprehensive test. This method addresses that gap, thereby providing a new and rigorous tool for evaluating the realism of climate simulations and measuring changes in variability over time.
Timothy DelSole and Michael K. Tippett
Adv. Stat. Clim. Meteorol. Oceanogr., 8, 187–203, https://doi.org/10.5194/ascmo-8-187-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/ascmo-8-187-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Most climate time series contain annual and diurnal cycles. However, an objective criterion for deciding whether two time series have statistically equivalent annual and diurnal cycles is lacking, particularly if the residual variability is serially correlated. Such a criterion would be helpful in deciding whether a new version of a climate model better simulates such cycles. This paper derives an objective rule for such decisions based on a rigorous statistical framework.
Timothy DelSole and Michael K. Tippett
Adv. Stat. Clim. Meteorol. Oceanogr., 7, 73–85, https://doi.org/10.5194/ascmo-7-73-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/ascmo-7-73-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
After a new climate model is constructed, a natural question is whether it generates realistic simulations. Here,
realisticdoes not mean that the detailed patterns on a particular day are correct, but rather that the statistics over many years are realistic. Past approaches to answering this question often neglect correlations in space and time. This paper proposes a method for answering this question that accounts for correlations in space and time.
Kelsey Malloy and Michael K. Tippett
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3145, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3145, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Tornado outbreaks—many tornadoes in short succession—have major impacts, but it is hard to accurately assess their risk because they are rare. We used weather model data to create hundreds of thousands of realistic but unseen tornado outbreak scenarios. With this event set, we estimated U.S. and local outbreak risk and detected clear links to La Niña and upward outbreak activity in recent years.
Timothy DelSole and Michael K. Tippett
Adv. Stat. Clim. Meteorol. Oceanogr., 10, 1–27, https://doi.org/10.5194/ascmo-10-1-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/ascmo-10-1-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This paper introduces a method to assess whether two data sets come from the same source. Current methods do not adequately consider spatial and temporal correlations and their annual cycles in a comprehensive test. This method addresses that gap, thereby providing a new and rigorous tool for evaluating the realism of climate simulations and measuring changes in variability over time.
Timothy DelSole and Michael K. Tippett
Adv. Stat. Clim. Meteorol. Oceanogr., 8, 187–203, https://doi.org/10.5194/ascmo-8-187-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/ascmo-8-187-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Most climate time series contain annual and diurnal cycles. However, an objective criterion for deciding whether two time series have statistically equivalent annual and diurnal cycles is lacking, particularly if the residual variability is serially correlated. Such a criterion would be helpful in deciding whether a new version of a climate model better simulates such cycles. This paper derives an objective rule for such decisions based on a rigorous statistical framework.
Michael K. Tippett, Chiara Lepore, and Michelle L. L’Heureux
Weather Clim. Dynam., 3, 1063–1075, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-3-1063-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-3-1063-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
The El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO) and Arctic Oscillation (AO) are phenomena that affect the weather and climate of North America. Although ENSO hails from from the tropical Pacific and the AO high above the North Pole, the spatial patterns of their influence on a North American tornado environment index are remarkably similar in computer models. We find that when ENSO and the AO act in concert, their impact is large, and when they oppose each other, their impact is small.
Timothy DelSole and Michael K. Tippett
Adv. Stat. Clim. Meteorol. Oceanogr., 7, 73–85, https://doi.org/10.5194/ascmo-7-73-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/ascmo-7-73-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
After a new climate model is constructed, a natural question is whether it generates realistic simulations. Here,
realisticdoes not mean that the detailed patterns on a particular day are correct, but rather that the statistics over many years are realistic. Past approaches to answering this question often neglect correlations in space and time. This paper proposes a method for answering this question that accounts for correlations in space and time.
Cited articles
Abdi, H. and Williams, L. J.: Principal component analysis, WIREs Comput.
Stat., 2, 433–459, https://doi.org/10.1002/wics.101, 2010. a, b
Alexander, M. A., Matrosova, L., Penland, C., Scott, J. D., and Chang, P.:
Forecasting Pacific SSTs: Linear Inverse Model Predictions of the
PDO, J. Clim., 21, 385–402, https://doi.org/10.1175/2007JCLI1849.1,
2008. a
Box, G. E. P., Jenkins, G. M., and Reinsel, G. C.: Time Series Analysis:
Forecasting and Control, Wiley-Interscience, 4th Edn., 746 pp., 2008. a
CMIP5: CLIVAR Exchanges – Special Issue: WCRP Coupled
Model Intercomparison Project – Phase 5 – CMIP5, Project Report 56, CMIP5 [data set], https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/194679/ (last access: 7 May 2020), 2011. a
DelSole, T.: Stochastic models of quasigeostrophic turbulence, Surv.
Geophys., 25, 107–149, 2004. a
DelSole, T.: diff.var.test.R, GitHub [code], https://github.com/tdelsole/Comparing-Time-Series, last access: 17 January 2022. a
DelSole, T. and Tippett, M. K.: Comparing climate time series – Part 1:
Univariate test, Adv. Stat. Clim. Meteorol. Oceanogr., 6, 159–175,
https://doi.org/10.5194/ascmo-6-159-2020, 2020. a
DelSole, T. and Tippett, M.: Statistical Methods for Climate Scientists,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 526 pp., 2022. a
DelSole, T. and Tippett, M. K.: Comparing climate time series – Part 2:
Multivariate test, Adv. Stat. Clim. Meteorol. Oceanogr., 7, 73–85,
https://doi.org/10.5194/ascmo-7-73-2021, 2021a. a
DelSole, T. and Tippett, M. K.: A mutual information criterion with
applications to canonical correlation analysis and graphical models, Stat,
10, e385, https://doi.org/10.1002/sta4.385, 2021b. a
Dias, D. F., Subramanian, A., Zanna, L., and Miller, A. J.: Remote and local
influences in forecasting Pacific SST: a linear inverse model and a
multimodel ensemble study, Clim. Dynam., 52, 1–19, 2018. a
Farrell, B. F. and Ioannou, P. J.: Stochastic dynamics of the midlatitude
atmospheric jet, J. Atmos. Sci., 52, 1642–1656, 1995. a
Flury, B. K.: Proportionality of k covariance matrices, Stat.
Prob. Lett., 4, 29–33,
https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-7152(86)90035-0, 1986. a
Fujikoshi, Y., Ulyanov, V. V., and Shimizu, R.: Multivariate Statistics:
High-dimensional and Large-Sample Approximations, John Wiley & Sons, 533 pp.,
2010. a
Gottwald, G. A., Crommelin, D. T., and Franzke, C. L. E.: Stochastic Climate
Theory, in: Nonlinear and Stochastic Climate Dynamics, edited by: Franzke, C.
L. E. and O'Kane, T. J., 209–240, Cambridge University Press,
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316339251.009, 2017. a
Huang, B., Thorne, P. W., Banzon, V. F., Boyer, T., Chepurin, G., Lawrimore,
J. H., Menne, M. J., Smith, T. M., Vose, R. S., and Zhang, H.-M.: Extended
Reconstructed Sea Surface Temperature, Version 5 (ERSSTv5): Upgrades,
Validations, and Intercomparisons, J. Clim., 30, 8179–8205,
https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0836.1, 2017. a
Huddart, B., Subramanian, A., Zanna, L., and Palmer, T.: Seasonal and decadal
forecasts of Atlantic Sea surface temperatures using a linear inverse
model, Clim. Dynam., 49, 1833–1845, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-016-3375-1, 2016. a
Kim, S.-H. and Cohen, A. S.: On the Behrens-Fisher Problem: A Review, J. Educat. Behav. Stat., 23, 356–377,
https://doi.org/10.3102/10769986023004356, 1998. a
Majda, A., Timofeyev, J., and Vanden-Eijnden, E.: Stochastic models for
selected slow variables in large deterministic systems, Nonlinearity, 19,
769–794, 2006. a
Mardia, K. V., Kent, J. T., and Bibby, J. M.: Multivariate Analysis, Academic
Press, 418 pp., 1979. a
Newman, M.: An Empirical benchmark for decadal forecasts of global surface
temperature anomalies, J. Clim., 26, 5260–5269, 2013. a
Newman, M. and Sardeshmukh, P. D.: Are we near the predictability limit of
tropical Indo-Pacific sea surface temperatures?, Geophys. Res.
Lett., 44, 8520–8529, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL074088, 2017. a
Noble, B. and Daniel, J. W.: Applied Linear Algebra, Prentice-Hall, 3rd Edn., 521 pp.,
1988. a
Penland, C.: Random forcing and forecasting using principal oscillation pattern
analysis, Mon. Weather Rev., 117, 2165–2185, 1989. a
Scheffé, H.: Practical Solutions of the Behrens-Fisher Problem, J. Am. Stat. Assoc., 65, 1501–1508,
https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1970.10481179, 1970. a
Shin, S.-I. and Newman, M.: Seasonal predictability of global and North American coastal sea surface temperature and height anomalies, Geophys. Res. Lett., 48, e2020GL091886, https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL091886, 2021. a, b
Taylor, K. E., Stouffer, R. J., and Meehl, G. A.: An Overview of CMIP5 and
the Experimental Design, Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 93, 485–498, 2012. a
Vimont, D. J.: Analysis of the Atlantic Meridional Mode Using Linear Inverse
Modeling: Seasonality and Regional Influences, J. Clim., 25, 1194–1212, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-11-00012.1, 2012. a
Wills, R. C., Schneider, T., Wallace, J. M., Battisti, D. S., and Hartmann,
D. L.: Disentangling Global Warming, Multidecadal Variability, and El
Niño in Pacific Temperatures, Geophys. Res. Lett., 45, 2487–2496,
https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL076327, 2018. a, b
Zanna, L.: Forecast skill and predictability of observed North Atlantic sea
surface temperatures, J. Clim., 25, 5047–5056, 2012. a
Download
- Article
(6676 KB) - Full-text XML
Short summary
A common problem in climate studies is to decide whether a climate model is realistic. Such decisions are not straightforward because the time series are serially correlated and multivariate. Part II derived a test for deciding wether a simulation is statistically distinguishable from observations. However, the test itself provides no information about the nature of those differences. This paper develops a systematic and optimal approach to diagnosing differences between stochastic processes.
A common problem in climate studies is to decide whether a climate model is realistic. Such...