While studying the IPCC
5th assessment report AR5, the author noted FAQ2.2 Figure 1 that was
used to argue warm days and nights have increased and cold days and nights have
decreased for period 1981-2010 as compared with period 1951-1980.
Firstly, the figure has obviously
misplaced major tick numbers of “10” and “5” for the abscissa; supposedly this is
a simple typo.
Secondly, label for the
ordinate “Probability” does not appear correct.
It should be “Probability Density.”
Label “Probability” is correct for discrete
probability graphs, which are usually displayed using bar graphs. The graphs in Figure 1 are all in a fashion
of continuous probability
distribution function. Probability for
any interval is expressed by the area size under the probability density curve over
the interval. The X-axis is of temperature
anomaly (°C) instead of the
Z-values, a more precise label for the Y-axis in this case can be “Probability Density
(1/°C)”.
Thirdly, we know logically
that: for discrete probability bar
graphs, summing up all the probability numbers leads to 1; for continuous probability curve graphs, total
area size under the probability density curve must equal 1.
The graphs in FAQ2.2 Figure
1 were digitised, and area size under the graphs was integrated. The area size is found to be an illogical
number approximately 0.5 instead of 1.0.
An example with the graph for 1951-1980 daily minimum temperature is
shown in the figure below. This fact
shows that there must be something incorrect in data handling and/or production
of the graphs.
No comments:
Post a Comment