Comparison of full and empirical Bayes approaches for inferring sea-level changes from tide-gauge data

Christopher G. Piecuch, Peter Huybers, Martin Patrick Tingley

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Tide-gauge data are one of the longest instrumental records of the ocean, but these data can be noisy, gappy, and biased. Previous studies have used empirical Bayes methods to infer the sea-level field from tide-gauge records but have not accounted for uncertainty in the estimation of model parameters. Here we compare to a fully Bayesian method that accounts for uncertainty in model parameters, and demonstrate that empirical Bayes methods underestimate the uncertainty in sea level inferred from tide-gauge records. We use a synthetic tide-gauge data set to assess the skill of the empirical and full Bayes methods. The empirical-Bayes credible intervals on the sea-level field are narrower and less reliable than the full-Bayes credible intervals: the empirical-Bayes 95% credible intervals are 42.8% narrower on average than are the full-Bayes 95% credible intervals; full-Bayes 95% credible intervals capture 95.6% of the true field values, while the empirical-Bayes 95% credible intervals capture only 77.1% of the true values, showing that parameter uncertainty has an important influence on the uncertainty of the inferred sea-level field. Most influential are uncertainties in model parameters for data biases (i.e., tide-gauge datums); letting data-bias parameters vary along with the sea-level process, but holding all other parameters fixed, the 95% credible intervals capture 92.8% of the true synthetic-field values. Results indicate that full Bayes methods are preferable for reconstructing sea-level estimates in cases where complete and accurate estimates of uncertainty are warranted.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)2243-2258
Number of pages16
JournalJournal of Geophysical Research: Oceans
Volume122
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2017

Fingerprint

Tide gages
tide gauge
Sea level
tides
gauges
sea level
sea level change
intervals
uncertainty
model uncertainty
parameter uncertainty
datum (elevation)
Bayesian theory
methodology
estimates
comparison
parameter
Uncertainty
oceans
method

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Geophysics
  • Forestry
  • Oceanography
  • Aquatic Science
  • Ecology
  • Water Science and Technology
  • Soil Science
  • Geochemistry and Petrology
  • Earth-Surface Processes
  • Atmospheric Science
  • Earth and Planetary Sciences (miscellaneous)
  • Space and Planetary Science
  • Palaeontology

Cite this

Piecuch, Christopher G. ; Huybers, Peter ; Tingley, Martin Patrick. / Comparison of full and empirical Bayes approaches for inferring sea-level changes from tide-gauge data. In: Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans. 2017 ; Vol. 122, No. 3. pp. 2243-2258.
@article{1e8bd5a39a6749da9be4909fdc6bfc92,
title = "Comparison of full and empirical Bayes approaches for inferring sea-level changes from tide-gauge data",
abstract = "Tide-gauge data are one of the longest instrumental records of the ocean, but these data can be noisy, gappy, and biased. Previous studies have used empirical Bayes methods to infer the sea-level field from tide-gauge records but have not accounted for uncertainty in the estimation of model parameters. Here we compare to a fully Bayesian method that accounts for uncertainty in model parameters, and demonstrate that empirical Bayes methods underestimate the uncertainty in sea level inferred from tide-gauge records. We use a synthetic tide-gauge data set to assess the skill of the empirical and full Bayes methods. The empirical-Bayes credible intervals on the sea-level field are narrower and less reliable than the full-Bayes credible intervals: the empirical-Bayes 95{\%} credible intervals are 42.8{\%} narrower on average than are the full-Bayes 95{\%} credible intervals; full-Bayes 95{\%} credible intervals capture 95.6{\%} of the true field values, while the empirical-Bayes 95{\%} credible intervals capture only 77.1{\%} of the true values, showing that parameter uncertainty has an important influence on the uncertainty of the inferred sea-level field. Most influential are uncertainties in model parameters for data biases (i.e., tide-gauge datums); letting data-bias parameters vary along with the sea-level process, but holding all other parameters fixed, the 95{\%} credible intervals capture 92.8{\%} of the true synthetic-field values. Results indicate that full Bayes methods are preferable for reconstructing sea-level estimates in cases where complete and accurate estimates of uncertainty are warranted.",
author = "Piecuch, {Christopher G.} and Peter Huybers and Tingley, {Martin Patrick}",
year = "2017",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1002/2016JC012506",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "122",
pages = "2243--2258",
journal = "Journal of Geophysical Research",
issn = "0148-0227",
publisher = "American Geophysical Union",
number = "3",

}

Comparison of full and empirical Bayes approaches for inferring sea-level changes from tide-gauge data. / Piecuch, Christopher G.; Huybers, Peter; Tingley, Martin Patrick.

In: Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, Vol. 122, No. 3, 01.03.2017, p. 2243-2258.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of full and empirical Bayes approaches for inferring sea-level changes from tide-gauge data

AU - Piecuch, Christopher G.

AU - Huybers, Peter

AU - Tingley, Martin Patrick

PY - 2017/3/1

Y1 - 2017/3/1

N2 - Tide-gauge data are one of the longest instrumental records of the ocean, but these data can be noisy, gappy, and biased. Previous studies have used empirical Bayes methods to infer the sea-level field from tide-gauge records but have not accounted for uncertainty in the estimation of model parameters. Here we compare to a fully Bayesian method that accounts for uncertainty in model parameters, and demonstrate that empirical Bayes methods underestimate the uncertainty in sea level inferred from tide-gauge records. We use a synthetic tide-gauge data set to assess the skill of the empirical and full Bayes methods. The empirical-Bayes credible intervals on the sea-level field are narrower and less reliable than the full-Bayes credible intervals: the empirical-Bayes 95% credible intervals are 42.8% narrower on average than are the full-Bayes 95% credible intervals; full-Bayes 95% credible intervals capture 95.6% of the true field values, while the empirical-Bayes 95% credible intervals capture only 77.1% of the true values, showing that parameter uncertainty has an important influence on the uncertainty of the inferred sea-level field. Most influential are uncertainties in model parameters for data biases (i.e., tide-gauge datums); letting data-bias parameters vary along with the sea-level process, but holding all other parameters fixed, the 95% credible intervals capture 92.8% of the true synthetic-field values. Results indicate that full Bayes methods are preferable for reconstructing sea-level estimates in cases where complete and accurate estimates of uncertainty are warranted.

AB - Tide-gauge data are one of the longest instrumental records of the ocean, but these data can be noisy, gappy, and biased. Previous studies have used empirical Bayes methods to infer the sea-level field from tide-gauge records but have not accounted for uncertainty in the estimation of model parameters. Here we compare to a fully Bayesian method that accounts for uncertainty in model parameters, and demonstrate that empirical Bayes methods underestimate the uncertainty in sea level inferred from tide-gauge records. We use a synthetic tide-gauge data set to assess the skill of the empirical and full Bayes methods. The empirical-Bayes credible intervals on the sea-level field are narrower and less reliable than the full-Bayes credible intervals: the empirical-Bayes 95% credible intervals are 42.8% narrower on average than are the full-Bayes 95% credible intervals; full-Bayes 95% credible intervals capture 95.6% of the true field values, while the empirical-Bayes 95% credible intervals capture only 77.1% of the true values, showing that parameter uncertainty has an important influence on the uncertainty of the inferred sea-level field. Most influential are uncertainties in model parameters for data biases (i.e., tide-gauge datums); letting data-bias parameters vary along with the sea-level process, but holding all other parameters fixed, the 95% credible intervals capture 92.8% of the true synthetic-field values. Results indicate that full Bayes methods are preferable for reconstructing sea-level estimates in cases where complete and accurate estimates of uncertainty are warranted.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85017341907&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85017341907&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/2016JC012506

DO - 10.1002/2016JC012506

M3 - Article

VL - 122

SP - 2243

EP - 2258

JO - Journal of Geophysical Research

JF - Journal of Geophysical Research

SN - 0148-0227

IS - 3

ER -