The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Statistics for the evaluation and comparison of models
Open accessAbstract
Procedures that may be used to evaluate the operational performance of a wide spectrum of geophysical models are introduced. Primarily using a complementary set of difference measures, both model accuracy and precision can be meaningfully estimated, regardless of whether the model predictions are manifested as scalars, directions, or vectors. It is additionally suggested that the reliability of the accuracy and precision measures can be determined from bootstrap estimates of confidence and significance. Recommended procedures are illustrated with a comparative evaluation of two models that estimate wind velocity over the South Atlantic Bight.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A leisurely look at the bootstrap, the jackknife, and cross-validation
Efron, B., & Gong, G. (1983) · The American Statistician · doi:10.1080/00031305.1983.10483087 · Cited by 3,229
Nonparametric estimates of standard error: The jackknife, the bootstrap and other methods
EFRON, B. (1981) · Biometrika · doi:10.1093/biomet/68.3.589 · Cited by 1,399
Research works printed but not linked: 19
- Bevington P. R., 1969, Data Reduction and Error Analysis for the Physical Sciences
- 10.2307/3314608 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.2307/2685844 · DOI
- 10.1175/1520-0477(1981)062<0599:JAQMP>2.0.CO;2 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1175/1520-0477(1984)065<0027:UIAQM>2.0.CO;2 · doi:10.1175/1520-0477(1984)065<0027:uiaqm>2.0.co;2
- 10.1175/1520-0493(1982)110<0657:ETSOCF>2.0.CO;2 · doi:10.1175/1520-0493(1982)110<0657:etsocf>2.0.co;2
- 10.1175/1520-0493(1983)111<1219:IOSEIA>2.0.CO;2 · doi:10.1175/1520-0493(1983)111<1219:ioseia>2.0.co;2
- James L. D., 1982, Hydrologic Modeling of Small Watersheds
- 10.1029/WR016i001p00173 · doi:10.1029/wr016i001p00173
- MacKay K. P., 1981, Statistical evaluation of air quality simulation models, Environmetics 81: Selected Papers
- 10.1029/WR011i006p01021 · DOI
- 10.1016/0022-1694(70)90255-6 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1175/1520-0469(1983)040<1884:NMRITU>2.0.CO;2 · doi:10.1175/1520-0469(1983)040<1884:nmritu>2.0.co;2
- 10.1080/00022470.1981.10465286 · doi:10.1080/00022470.1981.10465286
- 10.1029/JC088iC08p04593 · doi:10.1029/jc088ic08p04593
- 10.1080/02723646.1981.10642213 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1175/1520-0477(1982)063<1309:SCOTEO>2.0.CO;2 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1007/978-94-017-3048-8_23 · DOI · Paper page
- Won T. K., 1981, Handbook of Radiation Estimation Methods
Cited by
Rosenzweig, C., Elliott, J., Deryng, D., Ruane, A. C., Müller, C., Arneth, A., Boote, K. J., Folberth, C., Glotter, M., Khabarov, N., et al. (2014) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1222463110 · Cited by 2,319
Ritter, A., & Muñoz-Carpena, R. (2013) · Journal of Hydrology · doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.12.004 · Cited by 991
Wilks, D. S. (2011) · International Geophysics · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-385022-5.00008-7 · Cited by 727
Botchkarev, A. (2019) · Interdisciplinary Journal of Information, Knowledge, and Management · doi:10.28945/4184 · Cited by 616
Guidelines for assessing the suitability of spatial climate data sets
Daly, C. (2006) · International Journal of Climatology · doi:10.1002/joc.1322 · Cited by 601
Metadata
- Authors
- Willmott, C. J., Ackleson, S. G., Davis, R. E., Feddema, J. J., Klink, K. M., Legates, D. R., O'Donnell, J., & Rowe, C. M.
- Venue
- Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans
- Publisher
- American Geophysical Union (AGU)
- Published
- 1985-09-20
- Volume
- 90
- Issue
- C5
- Pages
- 8995-9005
- ISSN
- 0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2125848133
- Cited by
- 2,026
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 2.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Statistics for the evaluation and comparison of models. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/jc090ic05p08995
- The paper
- Willmott, C. J., Ackleson, S. G., Davis, R. E., Feddema, J. J., Klink, K. M., Legates, D. R., O'Donnell, J., & Rowe, C. M. (1985). Statistics for the evaluation and comparison of models. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans. https://doi.org/10.1029/jc090ic05p08995
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
