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)
boostedstates an association- 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
plainstates a cause- 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
hedgedstates a cause- 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.
plainstates an association- 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
boostedstates a cause- 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
hedgedstates an association- 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)
hedgedstates an association- 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)
boostedstates an association- 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
plainstates a cause- 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
plainstates a cause- 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
plainstates a cause- 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 5,401–5,500 of 7,174
Sun, X., Yan, S., Liu, C., et al. (2024) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5051151 · Cited by 1
Abdalla, Y., Gongas, L., Muñiz, B., Cela, L. R., Suárez, F., Orlu, M., Margusino‐Framiñán, L., Basit, A. W., Shorthouse, D., & Goyanes, Á. (2025) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-5907999/v1 · Cited by 1
Islam, S., Sardar, B., Kalogeraki, E.-M., et al. (2025) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5503123 · Cited by 1
MPCID, A new high-resolution multi-precipitation concentration indicators dataset for mainland China
Zhang, D., Li, X., Li, L., et al. (2026) · Scientific Data · doi:10.1038/s41597-025-06515-2 · Cited by 1
CPR-SAT: A context-aware pictogram recommendation system – a speech assistive technology
Evangeline, B., Moorthy, A. D., & Kuppa, K. S. (2026) · SoftwareX · doi:10.1016/j.softx.2026.102635 · Cited by 1
Alphabet Recognition for Deaf-Blind People
Rathore, Y. S., Mittal, C., & Basu, A. (2014) · IOSR Journal of Computer Engineering · doi:10.9790/0661-16561520
Improving the control structure of a high pressure leaching process
Knoblauch, P. D. (2015) · SUNScholar (Stellenbosch University)
Numeric promoter description – A comparative view on concepts and general application
Beier, R., & Labudde, D. (2015) · Journal of Molecular Graphics and Modelling · doi:10.1016/j.jmgm.2015.11.011
Oyelakin, O. A., Olabanji, L., & Ramirez, D. (2015) · SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition · doi:10.2118/174791-ms
Change Detection in Video using Pixel based Parametric Analysis
Reddy, M. R., Vaithiyanathan, V., Karthikeyan, B., et al. (2015) · Indian Journal of Science and Technology · doi:10.17485/ijst/2015/v8i35/80061
Svebrant, H., & Svanberg, J. (2016) · KTH Publication Database DiVA (KTH Royal Institute of Technology)
A Numerical Comparison of Symmetric and Asymmetric Supersonic Wind Tunnels
Clark, K. D., & Orkwis, P. D. (2016) · AIAA Fluid Dynamics Conference · doi:10.2514/6.2016-3802
Inference of binding affinity from neuronal receptors in humans
de Jesus, A. S. G. (2016) · Portuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT)
An Empirical Evaluation of Theories in Government Formation and Duration
Sutterud, L. K. (2015) · NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives
Hasim, S. H., Mamat, R., Sheikh, U. U., et al. (2016) · Studies in computational intelligence · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-33353-3_19
Modeling of drying rate of non-hygroscopic products: Application to the pozzolana drying
Randriamilantoniaina, Y., Andrianantenaina, M. H., Ramamonjisoa, B. O. A., et al. (2016) · Thermal Science · doi:10.2298/tsci160223170r
Guidance and Visualization for Brain Tumor Surgery
Marreiros, F. M. M. (2016) · Linköping studies in science and technology. Dissertations · doi:10.3384/diss.diva-130791
On the fusion of regression and neural network methods
Pwasong, A., & Sathasivam, S. (2016) · International Journal of Intelligent Systems Technologies and Applications · doi:10.1504/ijista.2016.078357
Comparative study of 1D de-noising techniques using induction motor fault signals
Lamia, R. T., & Iqbal, Z. (2016) · BRAC University Institutional Repository (BRAC University)
Estimating Time to Repair Failures in a Distributed System
Söderholm, M., & Habbe, L. (2016) · KTH Publication Database DiVA (KTH Royal Institute of Technology)
Cuong, L. D., & Tu, T. A. (2016) · Vietnam Journal of Marine Science and Technology · doi:10.15625/1859-3097/16/4/9037
Awe, G. O., Abegunrin, T. P., Ojediran, J. O., et al. (2017) · International Journal of Environment Agriculture and Biotechnology · doi:10.22161/ijeab/2.1.41
Maldonado, E. G., & Rodríguez‐Picón, L. A. (2017) · CULCyT: Cultura Científica y Tecnológica
Normative allometric human brain volume growth
Peterson, M. R. (2016)
Balina, R., & Juszczyk, S. (2017) · Zarządzanie Finansami i Rachunkowość · doi:10.22630/zfir.2017.5.1.04
Track inspection data filtering based on EMD
Wang, Y., & Liang, G. (2017) · AIP conference proceedings · doi:10.1063/1.4981552
Linder, H. L. (2017) · ResearchWorks at the University of Washington (University of Washington)
A Prediction Method to Improve Training Management
Elglaad, M., A., A., & E., E. (2017) · International Journal of Computer Applications · doi:10.5120/ijca2017914033
Analyzing Hierarchical Data with the DINA-HC Approach
Zhang, J. (2015) · doi:10.7916/d8pg1r67
Data Hiding of Stream Cipher in Audio File using Random Permutation Technique
Asmaa, A., & Hameed, A. (2017) · International Journal of Computer Applications · doi:10.5120/ijca2017915214
Predicting Important Patient-Reported Outcomes for Glaucoma Management: Cross-Sectional Study
Uruthiramoorthy, L. (2017) · Scholarship@Western (Western University)
Study on the Backlash Measurement and Software Compensation of Basis Weight Control Valve
Wang, B., Tang, W., Dong, J., et al. (2017) · Journal of Korea Technical Association of The Pulp and Paper Industry · doi:10.7584/jktappi.2017.08.49.4.16
Kashani, J. (2017) · Queensland University of Technology · doi:10.5204/thesis.eprints.107203
Computation Reduction for Angle of Arrival Estimation Based on Interferometer Principle
Chandail, M. (2017) · UWSpace (University of Waterloo)
Development of a Recommender System to the Virtual Patient Simulator Health Simulator
Reidel, D., Barros, P. R. M., Rigo, S. J., et al. (2017) · Brazilian Symposium on Multimedia and the Web · doi:10.1145/3126858.3131577
The new simulation model for estimating PV power output
Manosukritkul, P., & Titiroongruang, W. (2017) · International Electrical Engineering Congress (iEECON) · doi:10.1109/ieecon.2017.8075771
Stimulus based algorithm for extracting electrocardiogram signal from the head for eyewear devices
Silvadorai, K., Anwar, T., & Jamaludin, M. N. (2017) · ICT International Student Project Conference (ICT-ISPC) · doi:10.1109/ict-ispc.2017.8075359
Gilleran, S. (2017) · Aaltodoc (Aalto University)
Verification of new model by comparison with actual data
Manosukritkul, P., & Titiroongruang, W. (2017) · International Electrical Engineering Congress (iEECON) · doi:10.1109/ieecon.2017.8075770
On predicting wind power series by using Bayesian Enhanced modified based-neural network
Rivero, C. R., Pucheta, J. A., Otaño, P., et al. (2017) · doi:10.23919/rpic.2017.8214355
Selection of error measure for discrete periodic signals at high levels of fluctuating noise
Serheiev-Horchynskyi, O. (2017) · International Scientific-Practical Conference Problems of Infocommunications Science and Technology · doi:10.1109/infocommst.2017.8246397
Hybrid recommendation and parallelization of movies based on spark
Zhou, M., & Liu, Y. (2018) · International Conference on Machinery, Materials and Computer (MACMC) · doi:10.2991/macmc-17.2018.81
Irigoyen, A. I., Maune, C., & Bonelli, L. E. (2016) · El Servicio de Difusión de la Creación Intelectual (National University of La Plata)
Seasonal time series exploration using conditional probabilistic graphical approach
Purbarani, S. C., Sanabila, H. R., Ma’Sum, M. A., et al. (2017) · International Symposium on Micro-NanoMechatronics and Human Science · doi:10.1109/mhs.2017.8305220
Localization of wireless sensor networks using mobile anchor nodes
Ahmad, I. (2018) · The University of Queensland · doi:10.14264/uql.2018.219
Cogan, J. L. (2017) · Meteorological Applications · doi:10.1002/met.1684
Characteristics and simplified model of film slit irrigation
Li, Y., Liu, Y., Fan, H., et al. (2018) · Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science · doi:10.1080/03650340.2018.1477254
Tang, M., Xie, H., & Tang, T. Y. (2018) · International Conference on Big Data and Computing (ICBDC) · doi:10.1145/3220199.3220202
McCarthy, E., Deo, R. C., Li, Y., et al. (2018) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-4766-2.ch020
Adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy Inference System for Assessing the Maintainability of the Software
Therasa, P. R., & Vivekanandan, P. (2017) · International Conference on Advanced Computing · doi:10.1109/icoac.2017.8441467
Comparative Analysis of Time Series Method for Forecasting the Call Arrival of Call Center
Ryu, K.-D., & Kim, W.-J. (2018) · The Journal of Korean Institute of Information Technology · doi:10.14801/jkiit.2018.16.8.83
Calibração do modelo de consumo de combustível do simulador AIMSUN com dados coletados via OBD
Marinho, A. T., Eccel, R. A. L., Carlson, R. C., et al. (2018) · Transportes · doi:10.14295/transportes.v26i2.1393
Italy Population Prediction in Next Two Decades Based on WASD Neuronet
Guo, C., Ye, C., Feng, S., et al. (2018) · Chinese Control Conference (CCC) · doi:10.23919/chicc.2018.8483034
Modification on Shahad.A.H Distance for Images processing
Iraq (2018) · International Journal of Information Systems and Computer Sciences · doi:10.30534/ijiscs/2018/01752018
Rahman, B. (2018) · NDSU Repository (North Dakota State University) · doi:10.13140/rg.2.2.29421.97769
Toepke, S. L. (2018) · Communications in computer and information science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-06010-7_4
Mohamedou, C. (2019) · Dissertationes Forestales · doi:10.14214/df.268
Otimização do Streaming de Vídeo utilizando a informação de Consumo de Energia
Gouveia, D. J. D. S., & Rodríguez, D. Z. (2018) · doi:10.5753/sbrc.2018.2425
Design and development of ocean monitoring system based on GPS
Salleh, A. M. (2017) · UTHM Institutional Repository (Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia)
Based on Graph-VAE Model to Predict Student's ScorePreprint
Zhang, Y., & Lu, M. (2019) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1903.03609
Analysis of Urban Bicycles’ Trip Behavior and Efficiency Optimization
Wen, H., Zhou, S., Wang, Z., et al. (2019) · Studies in computational intelligence · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-04946-1_25
Generic Data Imputation and Feature Extraction for Signals from Multifunctional Printers.
Valčík, J., & Indyk, W. (2019) · EDBT/ICDT Workshops
Mabikwa, O. V. (2019) · White Rose eTheses Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York)
Using Gaussian Process Regression for the interpolation of missing 2.5D environment modelling data
Ogunniyi, S., Withey, D., & Marais, S. (2019) · Southern African Universities Power Engineering Conference/Robotics and Mechatronics/Pattern Recognition Association of South Africa (SAUPEC/RobMech/PRASA) · doi:10.1109/robomech.2019.8704780
Forecast modelling for the Icelandic automotive market
Jónsson, E. G. (2018)
Forecasting US inflation : Phillips curve, New Keynesian Phillips curve, or something else?
Kick, D. (2017) · Minds at UW (University of Wisconsin)
Development and Cross-Validation of a Cadence-Based Metabolic Equation for Walking
Moore, C. C. (2019) · Scholarworks (University of Massachusetts Amherst) · doi:10.7275/13986840
Evaluation Of The Cropsyst Model On Soybean (Glycine Max L.) In The Tropics
Gunadi, H., Kaimuddin, K., Baja, S., et al. (2018) · Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · doi:10.5281/zenodo.1302326
Using Machine Learning to Optimize Energy Consumption of HVAC Systems in Vehicles
Böhme, M., Lauber, A., Stang, M., et al. (2019) · Advances in intelligent systems and computing · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-25629-6_110
Reconstrução de oclusões parciais em imagens de face visando o reconhecimento biométrico
Targino, J. M. (2019) · Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations (Universidade de São Paulo) · doi:10.11606/d.100.2019.tde-17052019-214316
Development of Advection-Dispersion Model of Dissolved Oxygen Using Numerical Solutions
Mirhashemi, A., & Shayannejad, M. (2019) · JWSS - Isfahan University of Technology · doi:10.29252/jstnar.23.1.12
Li, S., & Liu, H. (2019) · International Conference on Digital Image Processing · doi:10.1117/12.2540055
Jha, R. K. (2019) · Illinois Digital Environment for Access to Learning and Scholarship (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign)
Instantaneous Flood Events Data Analyses in Northern Pakistan
Hussain, K., & Shahab, M. (2019) · European Scientific Journal ESJ · doi:10.19044/esj.2019.v15n24p240
Reagowanie przedsiębiorców na obniżanie oprocentowania kredytów w latach 2008-2016
Juszczyk, S. (2017) · Studia i Materiały Wydziału Zarządzania i Administracji Wyższej Szkoły Pedagogicznej im. Jana Kochanowskiego w Kielcach
FLORA: a hierarchical fuzzy system for online accommodation review analysis
Angskun, T., & Angskun, J. (2019) · Journal of Systems and Information Technology · doi:10.1108/jsit-03-2018-0046
Grechuta, A. (2018) · RePEc: Research Papers in Economics
Statistical Modelling of Significant Wave Height: Inshore and Offshore Bonny River Estuary, Nigeria
Ologhadien, I. (2019) · Civil and environmental research · doi:10.7176/cer/11-4-08
The Application of Latent Feature Model in Power Equipment Evaluation
Fan, Y., Xu, K., Huo, Y., et al. (2019) · IEEE Innovative Smart Grid Technologies-Asia · doi:10.1109/isgt-asia.2019.8881117
Iliyasu, U. (2019) · University of Salford Institutional Repository (University of Salford)
Feasibility and Reliability of a Commercially Available Stretch-Sensitive Sensor for Neck Movement
Al-Nasri, I. (2019) · Scholarship@Western (Western University)
New model averaging approach in predicting mortality rate of intensive care unit patients
Padzil, S. A. M., Pillay, K. G., Rusiman, M. S., et al. (2019) · Journal of Physics Conference Series · doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1366/1/012123
Kiram, J. J., Sulaiman, J., Swanto, S., et al. (2019) · AIP conference proceedings · doi:10.1063/1.5136391
Kathirvel, V., Mansor, M. A., Kasihmuddin, M. S. M., & Sathasivam, S. (2019) · AIP conference proceedings · doi:10.1063/1.5136438
Evaluation Error Measurement Tools Based on Blurred Image
Sari, F. A. (2016) · International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research
Quantificação de lignina em Brachiaria spp. medida por LDA, LBA e NIRS
Guimarães, I. (2019) · Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations (Universidade de São Paulo) · doi:10.11606/d.10.2019.tde-27062019-111337
Quantitative Analysis of Materials Based on Terahertz Spectroscopy
Gao, Y., Zhou, Y., & Xu, K. (2019) · International Conference on Optical Communications and Networks (ICOCN) · doi:10.1109/icocn.2019.8934897
Fisher, A. M. (2017) · KU ScholarWorks (The University of Kansas)
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
