Werndl, Charlotte (2015) The Diversity of Model Tuning Practices in Climate Science. [Preprint]

PDF ModelSelectionPSAFinalPreprint.pdf Download (217kB)

Abstract

Many examples of calibration in climate science raise no alarms regarding model reliability. We examine one example and show that, in employing Classical Hypothesis-testing, it involves calibrating a base model against
data that is also used to confirm the model. This is counter to the "intuitive position" (in favour of use-novelty and against double-counting). We argue, however, that aspects of the intuitive position are upheld by some methods, in particular, the general Cross-validation method. How Cross-validation relates to other prominent Classical methods such as the Akaike Information Criterion and Bayesian Information Criterion is also discussed.

---

Export/Citation:

EndNote | BibTeX | Dublin Core | ASCII/Text Citation (Chicago) | HTML Citation | OpenURL

Social Networking:

Share |

---

Item Type:	Preprint
Creators:	Creators Email ORCID Werndl, Charlotte c.s.werndl@lse.ac.uk
Additional Information:	Forthcoming in: Philosophy of Science
Keywords:	confirmation, double-counting, calibration, cross-validation, model selection theory, climate science
Subjects:	General Issues > Confirmation/Induction Specific Sciences > Earth Sciences General Issues > Models and Idealization Specific Sciences > Probability/Statistics
Depositing User:	Charlotte Werndl
Date Deposited:	30 Dec 2015 20:45
Last Modified:	30 Dec 2015 20:45
Item ID:	11833
Subjects:	General Issues > Confirmation/Induction Specific Sciences > Earth Sciences General Issues > Models and Idealization Specific Sciences > Probability/Statistics
Date:	2015
URI:	https://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/id/eprint/11833

Monthly Views for the past 3 years

Monthly Downloads for the past 3 years

Plum Analytics

Actions (login required)

View Item