The DOI matches its Crossref record; 13 of the 13 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 4 of the 8 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Root mean square error (RMSE) or mean absolute error (MAE)? – Arguments against avoiding RMSE in the literature
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Abstract. Both the root mean square error (RMSE) and the mean absolute error (MAE) are regularly employed in model evaluation studies. Willmott and Matsuura (2005) have suggested that the RMSE is not a good indicator of average model performance and might be a misleading indicator of average error, and thus the MAE would be a better metric for that purpose. While some concerns over using RMSE raised by Willmott and Matsuura (2005) and Willmott et al. (2009) are valid, the proposed avoidance of RMSE in favor of MAE is not the solution. Citing the aforementioned papers, many researchers chose MAE over RMSE to present their model evaluation statistics when presenting or adding the RMSE measures could be more beneficial. In this technical note, we demonstrate that the RMSE is not ambiguous in its meaning, contrary to what was claimed by Willmott et al. (2009). The RMSE is more appropriate to represent model performance than the MAE when the error distribution is expected to be Gaussian. In addition, we show that the RMSE satisfies the triangle inequality requirement for a distance metric, whereas Willmott et al. (2009) indicated that the sums-of-squares-based statistics do not satisfy this rule. In the end, we discussed some circumstances where using the RMSE will be more beneficial. However, we do not contend that the RMSE is superior over the MAE. Instead, a combination of metrics, including but certainly not limited to RMSEs and MAEs, are often required to assess model performance.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This technical note argues against the recommendation by Willmott and Matsuura (2005) and Willmott et al. (2009) to abandon RMSE in favor of MAE, showing that RMSE is not ambiguous in meaning and is more appropriate when errors are expected to be Gaussian. The authors also demonstrate that RMSE satisfies the triangle inequality required of a distance metric, contrary to the earlier claims, while concluding that a combination of metrics is often needed.
Key findings
- RMSE is not ambiguous in its meaning, contrary to Willmott et al. (2009); it is more appropriate than MAE when the error distribution is expected to be Gaussian, whereas MAE suits uniformly distributed errors.
- Using randomly generated zero-mean, unit-variance Gaussian pseudo-errors, RMSEs converge to the true standard deviation (SE = 1) once n ≥ 100, with standard deviation within 5% of truth; MAEs converge to 0.8, approximating the expectation of √(2/π). Neither metric is robust at n = 4 or n = 10.
- RMSE satisfies the triangle inequality required for a distance metric: the example in Willmott et al. (2009) (d(a,c)=4, d(a,b)=2, d(b,c)=3) actually represents the MSE, not the RMSE, and the L2-norm proof in Eqs. (5)–(7) shows RMSE does satisfy it.
- RMSE has practical advantages: it avoids absolute values (useful for gradients/sensitivities and data assimilation cost functions) and is generally better at discriminating among model results by weighting unfavorable conditions more heavily.
Methods
- Technical note / commentary design: no new observational dataset; the argument is analytical, using norm theory (L1- and L2-norms linked to MAE and RMSE) and a proof of the triangle inequality for the L2-norm.
- A Monte Carlo-style demonstration: five sets of pseudo-errors of size n = 4, 10, 100, 1000, 10 000, and 1000 000 drawn from a zero-mean, unit-variance Gaussian distribution with different random seeds, comparing RMSEs and MAEs (Table 1).
- Reference to prior empirical example: Chai et al. (2009) reported RMSE-to-MAE ratios of 1.63 to 2.29 for model NO2 column predictions versus SCIAMACHY satellite observations.
Limitations
- Stated by the authors: the analysis assumes unbiased errors and does not consider uncertainties from observation errors or the method used to compare model and observations; all statistics are less useful with limited sample sizes (e.g., n = 4 or 10), where presenting the errors themselves may be more appropriate; for non-normal distributions, additional moments (mean, variance, skewness, flatness) are needed; outliers several orders larger than other samples may justifiably be removed when sample numbers are limited, and systematic errors may need removal before computing RMSEs.
- Evident from the text: the demonstration relies on synthetic Gaussian pseudo-errors rather than real model–observation comparisons, so the convergence results are conditional on the Gaussian assumption; the authors explicitly do not claim RMSE is superior to MAE, so the note offers guidance rather than a definitive metric selection rule.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
14 Own interpretation · 6 No basis given · 4 Supported · 3 Sources not found · 3 Own result · 1 No full text of the sources · 1 Not checked yet
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Using hypothetical sets of four errors, Willmott and Matsuura (2005) demonstrated that while keeping the MAE as a constant of 2.0, the RMSE varies from 2.0 to 4.0.”
§ Root mean square error (RMSE) or mean absolute error (MAE)? -Arguments against avoiding RMSE in the literature > 1 Introduction
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Willmott and Matsuura (2005) source
Table 1 identifies five hypothetical sets of four errors, and Section 3 says their RMSE increases as the error magnitudes become more variable. The paper gives the bounds as MAE ≤ RMSE ≤ √n × MAE; with four errors and an MAE of 2.0, those bounds are 2.0 and 4.0. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.90)
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition, we show that the RMSE satisfies the triangle inequality requirement for a distance metric, whereas Willmott et al. (2009) indicated that the sums-ofsquares-based statistics do not satisfy this rule.”
- Also stated in: § 3 Triangle inequality of a metric · boosted
“This proves that RMSE satisfies the triangle inequality required for a distance function metric.”
- Also stated in: § 4 Summary and discussion · boosted
“In addition, we demonstrate that the RMSE satisfies the triangle inequality required for a distance function metric.”
§ Root mean square error (RMSE) or mean absolute error (MAE)? -Arguments against avoiding RMSE in the literature > Abstract
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § 3 Triangle inequality of a metric · boosted
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“When the sample size reaches 100 or above, using the calculated RMSEs one can re-construct the error distribution close to its “truth” or “exact solution”, with its standard deviation within 5 % to its truth (i.e., SE = 1).”
§ Root mean square error (RMSE) or mean absolute error (MAE)? -Arguments against avoiding RMSE in the literature > 2 Interpretation of RMSE and MAE
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The errors are unbiased and follow a normal distribution when presenting the RMSE.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The uncertainties brought in by observation errors or the method used to compare model and observations are not considered.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For instance, Table 1 shows that neither the RMSEs nor the MAEs are robust when only 4 or 10 samples are used to calculate those values.”
§ Root mean square error (RMSE) or mean absolute error (MAE)? -Arguments against avoiding RMSE in the literature > 2 Interpretation of RMSE and MAE
plainn = 10- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The errors are unbiased and follow a normal distribution when presenting the RMSE.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The uncertainties brought in by observation errors or the method used to compare model and observations are not considered.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The RMSE is more appropriate to represent model performance than the MAE when the error distribution is expected to be Gaussian.”
- Also stated in: § 1 Introduction · plain
“When the error distribution is expected to be Gaussian and there are enough samples, the RMSE has an advantage over the MAE to illustrate the error distribution.”
- Also stated in: § 4 Summary and discussion · plain
“We present that the RMSE is not ambiguous in its meaning, and it is more appropriate to use than the MAE when model errors follow a normal distribution.”
§ Root mean square error (RMSE) or mean absolute error (MAE)? -Arguments against avoiding RMSE in the literature > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Model errors are likely to have a normal distribution rather than a uniform distribution.
- Also stated in: § 1 Introduction · plain
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Giving higher weighting to the unfavorable conditions, the RMSE usually is better at revealing model performance differences.”
§ Root mean square error (RMSE) or mean absolute error (MAE)? -Arguments against avoiding RMSE in the literature > 4 Summary and discussion
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The L1-norm and L2-norm are closely related to the MAE and the RMSE, respectively, as shown in Eqs. ( 3) and ( 4): Horn and Johnson, 1990).”
§ Root mean square error (RMSE) or mean absolute error (MAE)? -Arguments against avoiding RMSE in the literature > 3 Triangle inequality of a metric
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Horn and Johnson, 1990
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“In this technical note, we demonstrate that the RMSE is not ambiguous in its meaning, contrary to what was claimed by Willmott et al. (2009).”
- Also stated in: § 4 Summary and discussion · plain
“We present that the RMSE is not ambiguous in its meaning, and it is more appropriate to use than the MAE when model errors follow a normal distribution.”
§ Root mean square error (RMSE) or mean absolute error (MAE)? -Arguments against avoiding RMSE in the literature > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Willmott et al. (2009)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § 4 Summary and discussion · plain
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“One distinct advantage of RMSEs over MAEs is that RM-SEs avoid the use of absolute value, which is highly undesirable in many mathematical calculations.”
§ Root mean square error (RMSE) or mean absolute error (MAE)? -Arguments against avoiding RMSE in the literature > 4 Summary and discussion
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Similarly, one can readily show that, for several sets of errors with the same RMSE, the MAE would vary from set to set.”
§ Root mean square error (RMSE) or mean absolute error (MAE)? -Arguments against avoiding RMSE in the literature > 1 Introduction
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Probably not a substantial claim. 10
- It may state two separate claims as one. 2
- The quote only partly states this claim. 1
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“They summarized that the RMSE tends to become increasingly larger than the MAE (but not necessarily in a monotonic fashion) as the distribution of error magnitudes becomes more variable.”
§ Root mean square error (RMSE) or mean absolute error (MAE)? -Arguments against avoiding RMSE in the literature > 1 Introduction
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Willmott and Matsuura (2005) source
The Concluding Remarks state the attributed point directly, including the qualification that the increase need not be monotonic. (LLM, conf=0.95)
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“They concluded that the RMSE varies with the variability of the the error magnitudes and the total-error or averageerror magnitude (MAE), and the sample size n.”
§ Root mean square error (RMSE) or mean absolute error (MAE)? -Arguments against avoiding RMSE in the literature > 1 Introduction
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Willmott and Matsuura (2005) source
The Concluding Remarks state that RMSE depends on error-magnitude variability, MAE, and the square root of sample size. The claim says it varies with sample size n, which accurately conveys that dependence without asserting that the relationship is linear. (LLM, conf=0.93)
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Willmott and Matsuura (2005) have simply proved that the RMSE is not equivalent to the MAE, and one cannot easily derive the MAE value from the RMSE (and vice versa).”
§ Root mean square error (RMSE) or mean absolute error (MAE)? -Arguments against avoiding RMSE in the literature > 1 Introduction
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Willmott and Matsuura (2005) source
Section 3 describes an inconsistent relationship between MAE and RMSE, including cases where RMSE changes with error-magnitude variance. Section 4 explains that RMSE depends on MAE, the distribution of error magnitudes, and the number of errors. This supports the claim that the measures are not equivalent and that one cannot generally derive either value from the other alone. (LLM, conf=0.90)
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Table 1 shows that the MAEs converge to 0.8, an approximation to the expectation of 2 π .”
§ Root mean square error (RMSE) or mean absolute error (MAE)? -Arguments against avoiding RMSE in the literature > 2 Interpretation of RMSE and MAE
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The errors are unbiased and follow a normal distribution when presenting the RMSE.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The uncertainties brought in by observation errors or the method used to compare model and observations are not considered.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“When both metrics are calculated, the RMSE is by definition never smaller than the MAE.”
§ Root mean square error (RMSE) or mean absolute error (MAE)? -Arguments against avoiding RMSE in the literature > 1 Introduction
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The MAE is suitable to describe uniformly distributed errors.”
§ Root mean square error (RMSE) or mean absolute error (MAE)? -Arguments against avoiding RMSE in the literature > 2 Interpretation of RMSE and MAE
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For other kinds of distributions, more statistical moments of model errors, such as mean, variance, skewness, and flatness, are needed to provide a complete picture of the model error variation.”
§ Root mean square error (RMSE) or mean absolute error (MAE)? -Arguments against avoiding RMSE in the literature > 4 Summary and discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“The ratio of RMSE to MAE ranged from 1.63 to 2.29 (see Table 1 of Chai et al., 2009).”
§ Root mean square error (RMSE) or mean absolute error (MAE)? -Arguments against avoiding RMSE in the literature > 1 Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Chai et al., 2009 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In many of the model sensitivity studies that use only RMSE, a detailed interpretation is not critical because variations of the same model will have similar error distributions.”
§ Root mean square error (RMSE) or mean absolute error (MAE)? -Arguments against avoiding RMSE in the literature > 4 Summary and discussion
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As every statistical measure condenses a large number of data into a single value, it only provides one projection of the model errors emphasizing a certain aspect of the error characteristics of the model performance.”
- Also stated in: § 4 Summary and discussion · plain
“As stated earlier, any single metric provides only one projection of the model errors and, therefore, only emphasizes a certain aspect of the error characteristics.”
§ Root mean square error (RMSE) or mean absolute error (MAE)? -Arguments against avoiding RMSE in the literature > 1 Introduction
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Also stated in: § 4 Summary and discussion · plain
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A combination of metrics, including but certainly not limited to RMSEs and MAEs, are often required to assess model performance.”
- Also stated in: § 4 Summary and discussion · plain
“A combination of metrics, including but certainly not limited to RMSEs and MAEs, are often required to assess model performance.”
§ Root mean square error (RMSE) or mean absolute error (MAE)? -Arguments against avoiding RMSE in the literature > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Also stated in: § 4 Summary and discussion · plain
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While the MAE gives the same weight to all errors, the RMSE penalizes variance as it gives errors with larger absolute values more weight than errors with smaller absolute values.”
§ Root mean square error (RMSE) or mean absolute error (MAE)? -Arguments against avoiding RMSE in the literature > 1 Introduction
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The authors state this as an assumption.
The errors are unbiased and follow a normal distribution when presenting the RMSE.
“The underlying assumption when presenting the RMSE is that the errors are unbiased and follow a normal distribution.”
“We also assume the error sample set is unbiased.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Model errors are likely to have a normal distribution rather than a uniform distribution.
“Because model errors are likely to have a normal distribution rather than a uniform distribution, the RMSE is a better metric to present than the MAE for such a type of data.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The uncertainties brought in by observation errors or the method used to compare model and observations are not considered.
“The uncertainties brought in by observation errors or the method used to compare model and observations are not considered here.”
The paper relies on this without support.
There are often hundreds of observations available to calculate model statistics.
“Fortunately, there are often hundreds of observations available to calculate model statistics, unlike the examples with n = 4 (Willmott and Matsuura, 2005) and n = 10 ( Willmott et al., 2009).”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Root mean square error (RMSE) or mean absolute error (MAE)? -Arguments against avoiding RMSE in the literature > 4 Summary and discussion
“| 4 | 0.92, 0.65, 1.48, 1.02, 0.79 0.70, 0.57, 1.33, 1.16, 0.76 | |”
§ Root mean square error (RMSE) or mean absolute error (MAE)? -Arguments against avoiding RMSE in the literature > 1 Introduction
“When both metrics are calculated, the RMSE is by definition never smaller than the MAE.”
Citations
Cites
Horn, R. A., & Johnson, C. R. (1985) · Cited by 22,203
David, F. N., & Tukey, J. W. (1977) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2529486 · Cited by 12,707
Willmott, C., & Matsuura, K. (2005) · Climate Research · doi:10.3354/cr030079 · Cited by 6,512 · cited 4×
“Further, Willmott et al. (2009) concluded that the sums-of-squaresbased error statistics such as the RMSE and the standard error have inherent ambiguities and recommended the use of alternates such as the MAE.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialHuber, P. J., & Ronchetti, E. M. (2009) · Wiley series in probability and statistics · doi:10.1002/9780470434697 · Cited by 1,823
Ambiguities inherent in sums-of-squares-based error statistics
Willmott, C. J., Matsuura, K., & Robeson, S. M. (2008) · Atmospheric Environment · doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.10.005 · Cited by 212 · cited 1×
“Fortunately, there are often hundreds of observations available to calculate model statistics, unlike the examples with n= 4 (Willmott and Matsuura, 2005) and n= 10 (Willmott et al., 2009).”
BackgroundMcKeen, S. A., Wilczak, J. M., Grell, G., et al. (2005) · Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · doi:10.1029/2005jd005858 · Cited by 208
Savage, N., Agnew, P., Davis, L. S., Ordóñez, C., Thorpe, R., Johnson, C. E., O’Connor, F. M., & Dalvi, M. (2013) · Geoscientific model development · doi:10.5194/gmd-6-353-2013 · Cited by 128
Taylor, M. H., Lösch, M., Wenzel, M., et al. (2013) · Journal of Climate · doi:10.1175/jcli-d-13-00089.1 · Cited by 93
Chai, T., Kim, H. C., Lee, P., et al. (2013) · Geoscientific model development · doi:10.5194/gmd-6-1831-2013 · Cited by 87
Self-citationA multi-physics ensemble of present-day climate regional simulations over the Iberian Peninsula
Jerez, S., Montávez, J. P., Jiménez‐Guerrero, P., et al. (2012) · Climate Dynamics · doi:10.1007/s00382-012-1539-1 · Cited by 80 · cited 2×
“(2009) (e.g., Taylor et al., 2013; Chatterjee et al., 2013; Jerez et al., 2013).”
Method
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 1,901–2,000 of 7,174
Cao, Y., Zhong, D., Shang, R., Ke, Q., Zhang, M., Xie, D., Liu, S., Zhao, C., & Wei, R. (2025) · Carbon Balance and Management · doi:10.1186/s13021-025-00308-1 · Cited by 15
Electrical Load Forecasting Over Multihop Smart Metering Networks With Federated Learning
Rahman, R., Moriano, P., Khan, S. U., et al. (2025) · IEEE Internet of Things Journal · doi:10.1109/jiot.2025.3586115 · Cited by 14
Machine learning-driven insights into the microstructure and properties of high-entropy alloys
Zhang, X., Zhou, W., Li, X., Xu, T., Yu, Y., Zheng, L., Jin, G., & Zhang, S. (2025) · Advanced Powder Materials · doi:10.1016/j.apmate.2025.100331 · Cited by 15
Husein, M., Balfaqih, M., Balfagih, Z., Pegalajar, M. C., & Gago, E. J. (2025) · Algorithms · doi:10.3390/a18080496 · Cited by 18
Huang, X., Schmelter, F., Seitzer, C., Martensen, L., Otzen, H., Piet, A., Witt, O., Schröder, T., Günther, U. L., Marshall, L., et al. (2025) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-14172-z · Cited by 25
Sui, T., Liu, S., Cong, B., Xu, X., Shan, D., Milano, G., Zhao, Y., Xu, S., & Mao, J. (2025) · npj Computational Materials · doi:10.1038/s41524-025-01773-5 · Cited by 16
Şen, S. G. (2025) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su17188378 · Cited by 14
Yuan, W., Yang, H. S., Han, Z., et al. (2025) · Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.engappai.2025.112656 · Cited by 14
Anttalainen, A., Mäkelä, M., Kumpulainen, P. S., et al. (2020) · Talanta · doi:10.1016/j.talanta.2020.121926 · Cited by 14
Chen, C., & Tyler, A. D. (2020) · Biology Direct · doi:10.1186/s13062-020-00287-y · Cited by 13
Choi, C., Jung, H., & Cho, J. (2021) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s21227595 · Cited by 14
Duan, Z., Liu, H., Li, Y., & Nikitas, N. (2022) · Energy · doi:10.1016/j.energy.2022.125021 · Cited by 14
A deep hashing method of likelihood function adaptive mapping
Su, H., Fang, J., Liu, W., Yu, S., & Yang, H. (2022) · Neural Computing and Applications · doi:10.1007/s00521-022-07962-3 · Cited by 14
Resilience characterized and quantified from physical activity data: A tutorial in R
Baretta, D., Koch, S., Cobo, I., Castaño‐Vinyals, G., de Cid, R., Carreras, A., Buekers, J., García‐Aymerich, J., Inauen, J., & Chevance, G. (2022) · Psychology of sport and exercise · doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2022.102361 · Cited by 14
Noreldeen, H. A. A., Huang, K., Wu, G.-W., et al. (2022) · Analytical Chemistry · doi:10.1021/acs.analchem.2c03814 · Cited by 14
Artificial Intelligence Based Regression Models for Prediction of Smart Grid Stability
Gönenç, A., Acar, E., Demir, I., et al. (2022) · Global Energy Conference (GEC) · doi:10.1109/gec55014.2022.9986814 · Cited by 14
A Robust and Efficient Loop Closure Detection Approach for Hybrid Ground/Aerial Vehicles
Wang, Y., Xu, B., Fan, W., & Xiang, C. (2023) · Drones · doi:10.3390/drones7020135 · Cited by 14
Apicella, L., Martino, M. D., Ferrando, I., et al. (2023) · Journal of Marine Science and Engineering · doi:10.3390/jmse11030671 · Cited by 14
Enhancing Shelf Life Prediction of Fresh Pizza with Regression Models and Low Cost Sensors
Wunderlich, P., Pauli, D., Neumaier, M., et al. (2023) · Foods · doi:10.3390/foods12061347 · Cited by 14
Tsele, P., Ramoelo, A., & Qabaqaba, M. (2023) · International Journal of Remote Sensing · doi:10.1080/01431161.2023.2205982 · Cited by 14
Experimental analysis of the effects of ship motion on hydrogen dispersion in an enclosed area
Kim, B., & Hwang, K.-I. (2023) · International Journal of Hydrogen Energy · doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.04.320 · Cited by 14
Butchy, A., Jain, U., Leasure, M., Covalesky, V. A., & Mintz, G. S. (2023) · Biomedicines · doi:10.3390/biomedicines11061526 · Cited by 15
Gully erosion susceptibility prediction in Mollisols using machine learning models
Wang, Y., Zhang, Y., & Chen, H. (2023) · Journal of Soil and Water Conservation · doi:10.2489/jswc.2023.00019 · Cited by 14
Shrimpseed_Net: Counting of Shrimp Seed Using Deep Learning on Smartphones for Aquaculture
Liu, D., Xu, B., Cheng, Y., et al. (2023) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2023.3302249 · Cited by 14
Zhang, J., Song, C., Cao, S., & Zhang, C. (2023) · Physica A Statistical Mechanics and its Applications · doi:10.1016/j.physa.2023.129173 · Cited by 14
Zaveri, J., Dhanushkodi, S. R., Kumar, C. R., et al. (2023) · Energies · doi:10.3390/en16196968 · Cited by 14
Zegeye, M. K., Ture, K., & Nedaw, D. (2023) · ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS RESEARCH · doi:10.1186/s40068-023-00325-4 · Cited by 14
SOSSF: Landsat-8 Image Synthesis on the Blending of Sentinel-1 and MODIS Data
Xia, Y., He, W. P., Huang, Q., et al. (2024) · IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing · doi:10.1109/tgrs.2024.3352662 · Cited by 14
LIR-Net:Learnable Iterative Reconstruction Network for Fan Beam CT Sparse-View Reconstruction
Cheng, Y., Li, Q. X., Li, R., et al. (2024) · IEEE Transactions on Computational Imaging · doi:10.1109/tci.2024.3358673 · Cited by 14
Panjee, P., & Amornsawadwatana, S. (2024) · Risks · doi:10.3390/risks12020025 · Cited by 14
Data-driven study of composition-dependent phase compatibility in NiTi shape memory alloys
Zadeh, S. H., Cakirhan, C., Khatamsaz, D., et al. (2024) · Materials & Design · doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2024.113096 · Cited by 14
Angula, T. N., & Dongo, A. (2024) · GSC Biological and Pharmaceutical Sciences · doi:10.30574/gscbps.2024.26.2.0071 · Cited by 18
Time Series Prediction Based on Multi-Scale Feature Extraction
Zhang, R., & Hao, Y. (2024) · Mathematics · doi:10.3390/math12070973 · Cited by 14
Working memory capacity for continuous events: The root of temporal compression in episodic memory?
Leroy, N., Majerus, S., & D’Argembeau, A. (2024) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2024.105789 · Cited by 18
Generalizability of empirical correlations for predicting higher heating values of biomass
Daşkın, M., Erdoğan, A., Güleç, F., & Okolie, J. A. (2024) · Energy Sources Part A Recovery Utilization and Environmental Effects · doi:10.1080/15567036.2024.2332472 · Cited by 14
DeepFogAQ: A fog-assisted decentralized air quality prediction and event detection system
Şimşek, M. U., Kök, İ., & Özdemi̇r, S. (2024) · Expert Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2024.123920 · Cited by 15
Barudžija, U., Ivšinović, J., & Malvić, T. (2024) · Geosciences · doi:10.3390/geosciences14060155 · Cited by 16
Battery Health Index: Combination of Physical and ML-Based SoH for Continuous Health Tracking
Bokstaller, J., Schneider, J., Lux, S. F., & Brocke, J. V. (2024) · IEEE Internet of Things Journal · doi:10.1109/jiot.2024.3429338 · Cited by 14
Cooperative Air-Ground Instant Delivery by UAVs and Crowdsourced Taxis
Gao, J., Wang, Q., Zhang, X., et al. (2024) · Proceedings - International Conference on Data Engineering · doi:10.1109/icde60146.2024.00120 · Cited by 14
Predicting air quality using random forest: A case study in Amman-Zarqa
Alzu’bi, F., Al-Rawabdeh, A., & Almagbile, A. (2024) · The Egyptian Journal of Remote Sensing and Space Science · doi:10.1016/j.ejrs.2024.07.004 · Cited by 14
Jin, J., Liu, P., Huang, H., et al. (2024) · Applied Geography · doi:10.1016/j.apgeog.2024.103402 · Cited by 14
Lee, H., Kim, S., Kim, B. S., Lee, S., Yi, Y. J., Jeon, H. B., Son, M., Park, K., Park, C. H., Oh, H., et al. (2024) · Applied Rheology · doi:10.1515/arh-2024-0016 · Cited by 15
A New Sphalerite Thermometer Based on Machine Learning with Trace Element Geochemistry
Zhao, H., Zhang, Y., Shao, Y., Liao, J. X., Song, S., Cao, G., & Tan, R.-C. (2024) · Natural Resources Research · doi:10.1007/s11053-024-10408-3 · Cited by 18
Exploring soil pollution patterns in Ghana's northeastern mining zone using machine learning models
Kwayisi, D., Kazapoe, R. W., Alidu, S., Sagoe, S. D., Umaru, A. O., Amuah, E. E. Y., & Kpiebaya, P. (2024) · Journal of Hazardous Materials Advances · doi:10.1016/j.hazadv.2024.100480 · Cited by 16
AbdulNabi, M. A., Hamza, B. J., & Abdulsadda, A. T. (2024) · Telecommunication Systems · doi:10.1007/s11235-024-01218-2 · Cited by 14
An AI-Based Digital Twin Framework for Intelligent Traffic Management in Singapore
Aloupogianni, E., Doctor, F., Karyotis, C., Maniak, T., Tang, R., & Iqbal, R. (2024) · International Conference on Electrical, Computer and Energy Technologies (ICECET) · doi:10.1109/icecet61485.2024.10698642 · Cited by 15
Dias, R. L. S., Amorim, R. S. S., da Silva, D. D., Filho, E. I. F., Veloso, G. V., & Macedo, R. H. F. (2024) · Remote Sensing · doi:10.3390/rs16214047 · Cited by 17
Efficient Reduced-Order modeling for steam turbine rotors using TCN-enhanced SVD
Cai, X.-B., Gu, H.-H., Mu, W.-W., et al. (2025) · Applied Thermal Engineering · doi:10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2025.126168 · Cited by 14
Li, H., Pan, X., Jiang, Y. Q., et al. (2025) · Biosystems Engineering · doi:10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2025.02.009 · Cited by 14
Surface ozone trend variability across the United States and the impact of heat waves (1990–2023)
Chang, K., McDonald, B., Harkins, C., & Cooper, O. R. (2025) · Atmospheric chemistry and physics · doi:10.5194/acp-25-5101-2025 · Cited by 14
Abdi, E., Sattari, M. T., Milewski, A. M., & Ibrahim, O. R. (2025) · Water · doi:10.3390/w17111660 · Cited by 15
A Methodology for Online Consolidation of Tasks through More Accurate Resource Estimations
Iglesias, J. O., Murphy, L., Cauwer, M. D., et al. (2014) · IEEE/ACM International Conference on Utility and Cloud Computing (UCC) · doi:10.1109/ucc.2014.17 · Cited by 14
Gupta, S., Basant, N., Mohan, D., et al. (2016) · SAR and QSAR in environmental research · doi:10.1080/1062936x.2016.1199592 · Cited by 14
Online prediction of dense medium suspension density based on phase space reconstruction
Sun, X., Cao, Z., Yue, Y., et al. (2017) · Particulate Science And Technology · doi:10.1080/02726351.2017.1333180 · Cited by 14
Cherie, D., Rini, R., & Makky, M. (2019) · AIP conference proceedings · doi:10.1063/1.5125538 · Cited by 14
Ciupak, M., Ozga-Zieliński, B., Adamowski, J., Deo, R. C., & Kochanek, K. (2019) · Water · doi:10.3390/w11102138 · Cited by 14
An Empirical Study on V2X Enhanced Low-Cost GNSS Cooperative Positioning in Urban Environments
Schwarzbach, P., Michler, A., Tauscher, P., & Michler, O. (2019) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s19235201 · Cited by 14
Image Spatial Domain Steganography: A study of Performance Evaluation Parameters
Abdulwahed, M. N., Mustafa, S. T., & Rahim, M. S. M. (2019) · IEEE International Conference on System Engineering and Technology (ICSET) · doi:10.1109/icsengt.2019.8906402 · Cited by 14
Fang, Y., Ding, G., Wen, W., Yuan, F., Yang, Y., Fang, Z., & Lin, W. (2019) · IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics · doi:10.1109/tie.2019.2956418 · Cited by 14
Haditiar, Y., Putri, M. R., Ismail, N., et al. (2019) · Engineering Journal · doi:10.4186/ej.2019.23.6.129 · Cited by 14
Wang, H., Yang, T., & Wang, Z. (2020) · The Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138844 · Cited by 19
Spectral Reflectance Reconstruction Using Fuzzy Logic System Training: Color Science Application
Amiri, M. M., García-Nieto, S., Morillas, S., et al. (2020) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s20174726 · Cited by 14
Khlaifat, N., Altaee, A., Zhou, J. L., et al. (2020) · Energy Sources Part A Recovery Utilization and Environmental Effects · doi:10.1080/15567036.2020.1822956 · Cited by 14
Zhang, X., Liang, J., Wang, B., et al. (2020) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph17197316 · Cited by 14
Makaba, T., Doorsamy, W., & Paul, B. S. (2020) · Cogent Engineering · doi:10.1080/23311916.2020.1834659 · Cited by 14
Yatmaz, E., Germeç, M., Erkan, S. B., et al. (2020) · Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery · doi:10.1007/s13399-020-01154-6 · Cited by 14
System Identification for Propellers at High Incidence Angles
Simmons, B. M. (2021) · AIAA SciTech Forum · doi:10.2514/6.2021-1190 · Cited by 14
Mahdavi, A., Amirzadeh, V., Jamalizadeh, A., et al. (2021) · Computational Statistics · doi:10.1007/s00180-021-01079-2 · Cited by 14
Olvera‐Gonzalez, E., Rivera, M. M., Escalante‐Garcia, N., & Flores-Gallegos, E. (2021) · Applied Sciences · doi:10.3390/app11062735 · Cited by 14
Abunama, T., Ansari, M., Awolusi, O. O., et al. (2021) · Journal of Environmental Management · doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112862 · Cited by 14
Muthusamy, L. P., Periyasamy, A. P., Militký, J., & Rajan, T. P. (2021) · Journal of Testing and Evaluation · doi:10.1520/jte20210175 · Cited by 14
Mohammed, A., Yazid, M. R. M., Zaidan, B. B., Zaidan, A. A., Garfan, S., Zaidan, R. A., Ameen, H. A., Kareem, Z. H., & Malik, R. Q. (2021) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2021.3102222 · Cited by 14
Forecasting renewable energy for environmental resilience through computational intelligence
Khan, M., Al‐Ammar, E. A., Naeem, M. R., et al. (2021) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0256381 · Cited by 14
Gakii, C., Mireji, P. O., & Rimiru, R. M. (2022) · Algorithms · doi:10.3390/a15010021 · Cited by 14
Zhao, T., Zhu, Y. P., Ye, M., et al. (2022) · Agricultural Water Management · doi:10.1016/j.agwat.2022.107500 · Cited by 14
Harripersadth, C., & Musonge, P. (2022) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su14137662 · Cited by 14
Hwang, J., Yoon, H. M., Hwang, J., et al. (2022) · Yonsei Medical Journal · doi:10.3349/ymj.2022.63.7.683 · Cited by 14
Mukhtar, M., Ali, M. K. M., Ismail, M. T., Hamundu, F. M., Alimuddin, A., Akhtar, N., & Fudholi, A. (2022) · International Journal of Power Electronics and Drive Systems/International Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering · doi:10.11591/ijece.v12i4.pp4457-4468 · Cited by 20
Deep learning-based low-dose CT for adaptive radiotherapy of abdominal and pelvic tumors
Gong, W. J., Yao, Y., Ni, J., et al. (2022) · Frontiers in Oncology · doi:10.3389/fonc.2022.968537 · Cited by 14
Li, M., Gao, S., Qiu, P., Tu, W., Lu, F., Zhao, T., & Li, Q. (2022) · Transportation Research Part C Emerging Technologies · doi:10.1016/j.trc.2022.103908 · Cited by 15
Wu, Y., Zhang, Y., Xu, K., et al. (2022) · IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE) · doi:10.1145/3551349.3556940 · Cited by 14
de Barros, A. S., Fragassa, C., Paiva, M. D. S., et al. (2023) · Journal of Marine Science and Engineering · doi:10.3390/jmse11020412 · Cited by 14
Spatiotemporal estimation of TROPOMI NO2 column with depthwise partial convolutional neural network
Lops, Y., Ghahremanloo, M., Pouyaei, A., Choi, Y., Jung, J., Mousavinezhad, S., Salman, A. K., & Hammond, D. M. (2023) · Neural Computing and Applications · doi:10.1007/s00521-023-08558-1 · Cited by 18
TrGPCR: GPCR–Ligand Binding Affinity Prediction Based on Dynamic Deep Transfer Learning
Lu, Y., Zhang, R., Jiang, T., Fu, Q., Cui, Z., & Wu, H. (2023) · IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics · doi:10.1109/jbhi.2023.3307928 · Cited by 15
Gerges, F., Boufadel, M. C., Bou-Zeid, E. R., Nassif, H. H., & Wang, J. T. L. (2023) · Knowledge and Information Systems · doi:10.1007/s10115-023-01955-x · Cited by 14
Moussa, H., Benallal, M. A., Goyet, C., et al. (2015) · ESAIM Proceedings and Surveys · doi:10.1051/proc/201549006 · Cited by 14
Reporting and Visualizing Fitts's Law
Jude, A., Guinness, D., & Poor, G. M. (2016) · doi:10.1145/2851581.2892364 · Cited by 14
Sañudo-Fontaneda, L. Á., Jato‐Espino, D., Lashford, C., et al. (2017) · Environmental Science and Pollution Research · doi:10.1007/s11356-017-9170-7 · Cited by 14
Prediction of surface distress using neural networks
Hamdi, Hadiwardoyo, S. P., Correia, A. G., et al. (2017) · AIP conference proceedings · doi:10.1063/1.4985502 · Cited by 14
Evolution of market concentration and competition in the microfinance industry of Bangladesh
Mia, M. (2018) · International Journal of Social Economics · doi:10.1108/ijse-10-2016-0281 · Cited by 14
Mfwango, L. H., Salim, C. J., & Kazumba, S. (2018) · Hydrology Current Research · doi:10.4172/2157-7587.1000299 · Cited by 14
A Decentralized Framework for Parameter and State Estimation of Infiltration Processes
Bo, S., & Liu, J. (2020) · Mathematics · doi:10.3390/math8050681 · Cited by 14
Failure Detection on Electronic Systems Using Thermal Images and Metaheuristic Algorithms
Hernández, G. R., Navarro, M. A., Ortega-Sánchez, N., et al. (2020) · IEEE Latin America Transactions · doi:10.1109/tla.2020.9111672 · Cited by 14
Using Analog Ensembles with Alternative Metrics for Hindcasting with Multistations
Balsa, C., Rodrigues, C. V., Lopes, I., et al. (2020) · ParadigmPlus · doi:10.55969/paradigmplus.v1n2a1 · Cited by 14
Yin, T., Zeng, J., Zhang, X., & Zhou, X. (2020) · IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing · doi:10.1109/jstars.2020.3038819 · Cited by 14
Germeç, M., & Turhan, İ. (2021) · Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery · doi:10.1007/s13399-021-01830-1 · Cited by 14
Verma, V. K., & Aggarwal, R. K. (2019) · International Journal of Information Technology and Computer Science · doi:10.5815/ijitcs.2019.06.05 · Cited by 14
Boudjelal, A., Messali, Z., Elmoataz, A., et al. (2017) · Journal of medical imaging and radiation sciences · doi:10.1016/j.jmir.2017.09.005 · Cited by 14
Crop Models as Tools for Agroclimatology
Webber, H. A., Hoffmann, M. P., & Rezaei, E. E. (2018) · Agronomy monograph/Agronomy · doi:10.2134/agronmonogr60.2016.0025 · Cited by 14
Interpretable Unsupervised Anomaly Detection For RAN Cell Trace Analysis
Chawla, A., Jacob, P., Feghhi, S., Rughwani, D., van der Meer, S., & Fallon, S. (2020) · 2020 16th International Conference on Network and Service Management (CNSM) · doi:10.23919/cnsm50824.2020.9269108 · Cited by 14
“The Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE) [18] is used as an evaluation metric to calculate the squared error difference between the observed ( x ) and predicted ( x (cid:48) ) values of a set of n .”
Method
Metadata
- Authors
- Chai, T., & Draxler, R. R.
- Affiliations
- National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (US)
- Venue
- Geoscientific Model Development
- Publisher
- Copernicus GmbH
- Published
- 2014-06-30
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 1247-1250
- ISSN
- 1991-959X (ISSN-L)
- 1991-9603
- OpenAlex
- W2102148524
- Semantic Scholar
- 8c42db1839098b46f18265907464c16e49bb7a1c
- Cited by
- 7,178
- References
- 12
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1015 · 2025: 1120 · 2024: 980 · 2023: 873 · 2022: 751 · 2021: 683 · 2020: 538 · 2019: 411 · 2018: 324 · 2017: 235 · 2016: 175 · 2015: 59 · 2014: 13
- FWCI
- 106.31
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Geoscientific model development (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NA09NES4400006)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Meteorological Phenomena and Simulations
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Hydrology and Watershed Management Studies
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Forecasting Techniques and Applications
- Keywords
- root mean square error, mean absolute error, model evaluation metrics, error distribution, Gaussian errors, triangle inequality, distance measures, model evaluation, hydrological model evaluation
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-17, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-17 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
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
