Combining probability with qualitative degree-of-certainty metrics in assessment

Casey Helgeson, Richard Bradley, Brian Hill

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) employ an evolving framework of calibrated language for assessing and communicating degrees of certainty in findings. A persistent challenge for this framework has been ambiguity in the relationship between multiple degree-of-certainty metrics. We aim to clarify the relationship between the likelihood and confidence metrics used in the Fifth Assessment Report (2013), with benefits for mathematical consistency among multiple findings and for usability in downstream modeling and decision analysis. We discuss how our proposal meshes with current and proposed practice in IPCC uncertainty assessment.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)517-525
Number of pages9
JournalClimatic Change
Volume149
Issue number3-4
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1 2018

Fingerprint

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
decision analysis
modeling

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Global and Planetary Change
  • Atmospheric Science

Cite this

Helgeson, Casey ; Bradley, Richard ; Hill, Brian. / Combining probability with qualitative degree-of-certainty metrics in assessment. In: Climatic Change. 2018 ; Vol. 149, No. 3-4. pp. 517-525.
@article{6a1f22f889b24b029d47eb27d746a6bd,
title = "Combining probability with qualitative degree-of-certainty metrics in assessment",
abstract = "Reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) employ an evolving framework of calibrated language for assessing and communicating degrees of certainty in findings. A persistent challenge for this framework has been ambiguity in the relationship between multiple degree-of-certainty metrics. We aim to clarify the relationship between the likelihood and confidence metrics used in the Fifth Assessment Report (2013), with benefits for mathematical consistency among multiple findings and for usability in downstream modeling and decision analysis. We discuss how our proposal meshes with current and proposed practice in IPCC uncertainty assessment.",
author = "Casey Helgeson and Richard Bradley and Brian Hill",
year = "2018",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s10584-018-2247-6",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "149",
pages = "517--525",
journal = "Climatic Change",
issn = "0165-0009",
publisher = "Springer Netherlands",
number = "3-4",

}

Combining probability with qualitative degree-of-certainty metrics in assessment. / Helgeson, Casey; Bradley, Richard; Hill, Brian.

In: Climatic Change, Vol. 149, No. 3-4, 01.08.2018, p. 517-525.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Combining probability with qualitative degree-of-certainty metrics in assessment

AU - Helgeson, Casey

AU - Bradley, Richard

AU - Hill, Brian

PY - 2018/8/1

Y1 - 2018/8/1

N2 - Reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) employ an evolving framework of calibrated language for assessing and communicating degrees of certainty in findings. A persistent challenge for this framework has been ambiguity in the relationship between multiple degree-of-certainty metrics. We aim to clarify the relationship between the likelihood and confidence metrics used in the Fifth Assessment Report (2013), with benefits for mathematical consistency among multiple findings and for usability in downstream modeling and decision analysis. We discuss how our proposal meshes with current and proposed practice in IPCC uncertainty assessment.

AB - Reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) employ an evolving framework of calibrated language for assessing and communicating degrees of certainty in findings. A persistent challenge for this framework has been ambiguity in the relationship between multiple degree-of-certainty metrics. We aim to clarify the relationship between the likelihood and confidence metrics used in the Fifth Assessment Report (2013), with benefits for mathematical consistency among multiple findings and for usability in downstream modeling and decision analysis. We discuss how our proposal meshes with current and proposed practice in IPCC uncertainty assessment.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85050686909&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85050686909&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s10584-018-2247-6

DO - 10.1007/s10584-018-2247-6

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85050686909

VL - 149

SP - 517

EP - 525

JO - Climatic Change

JF - Climatic Change

SN - 0165-0009

IS - 3-4

ER -