Notes to Tables and Figures
Table 1: We show each forecast’s root mean squared error, measured in degrees Fahrenheit.
Figure 1: Each panel displays a time-series plot of daily average temperature, 1996-2001.
Figure 2: Each panel displays a kernel density estimate of the unconditional distribution of daily average
temperature, 1960-2001. In each case, we employ the Epanechnikov kernel and select the bandwidth using
Silverman’s rule, h=O.9σN~02.
Figure 3: Each panel displays the residuals from an unobserved-components model,
η = Trendt + Sea9ona0t + ∑‰ P,Λ-,∙ + σ∕εr 1996-2001.
Figure 4: Each panel displays a kernel density estimate of the distribution of the residuals from our daily
average temperature model, Tt - Trendt - Seasonalt - pi∙T,f.i∙. In each case, we employ the
Epanechnikov kernel and select the bandwidth using Silverman’s rule, h=O.9σN~02.
Figure 5: Each panel displays sample autocorrelations of the squared residuals from our daily average
temperature model, ,Tt - Tregdt - Setasothtelt - jɪ p,.7ζ,,.j2, together with Bartlett’s approximate ninety-
five percent confidence intervals under the null hypothesis of white noise.
Figure 6: Each panel displays a time series of estimated conditional standard deviations (σf) of daily
average temperature, where ot = ɪ^i ^γc + γs^sin^2π<7-∣∣θj + Ctejl1 + βo^1, 1996-2001.
Figure 7: Each panel displays the ratio of a forecast’s RMSPE to that of a persistence forecast, for 1-day-
ahead through 11-day-ahead horizons. The solid line refers to the EarthSat forecast, and the dashed line
refers to the autoregressive forecast. The forecast evaluation period is 10/11/99 - 10/22/01.
Figure 8: Each panel displays the ratio of a forecast’s RMSPE to that of a climatological forecast, for 1-
day-ahead through 11-day-ahead horizons. The solid line refers to the EarthSat forecast, and the dashed
line refers to the autoregressive forecast. The forecast evaluation period is 10/11/99 - 10/22/01.
Figure 9: Each row displays a histogram for z and correlograms for four powers of z, the probability
integral transform of cumulative November-March HDDs, 1960-2000. Dashed lines indicate approximate
ninety-five percent confidence intervals in the iid U(0,1) case of correct conditional calibration.
More intriguing information
1. Insecure Property Rights and Growth: The Roles of Appropriation Costs, Wealth Effects, and Heterogeneity2. The name is absent
3. The name is absent
4. Visual Artists Between Cultural Demand and Economic Subsistence. Empirical Findings From Berlin.
5. Policy Formulation, Implementation and Feedback in EU Merger Control
6. Two-Part Tax Controls for Forest Density and Rotation Time
7. The name is absent
8. Geography, Health, and Demo-Economic Development
9. Recognizability of Individual Creative Style Within and Across Domains: Preliminary Studies
10. The name is absent