MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Economic Value of Weather and Climate Forecasts

2012· book-chapter· en· W2155094271 on OpenAlexaff
Richard W. Katz, Jeffrey K. Lazo

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford University Press eBooks · 2012
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Environmental Valuation
Canadian institutionsImpact
FundersNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
KeywordsValuation (finance)Value (mathematics)Section (typography)Willingness to payClimate changeContingent valuationEconomicsRevealed preferenceClimatologyEnvironmental scienceMeteorologyEconometricsGeographyComputer scienceMathematicsStatisticsMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article, which deals with methods for quantifying the economic value of weather and climate forecasts, is organized as follows. Section 2 provides some background on methods used to produce weather and climate forecasts, including the distinction between “weather” and “climate.” Section 3 introduces the concept of the economic value of imperfect information, based on the framework of decision theory and expected utility maximization. Section 4 reviews specific decision-analytic studies of the economic value of weather and climate forecasts. As a complement to the decision-theoretic approach, nonmarket valuation of weather and climate forecasts based on stated preference methods are described in Section 5. As an example, a recent survey of the public to obtain willingness-to-pay estimates for the economic value of improved hurricane forecasts is treated in detail. Finally, Section 6 consists of a discussion focusing on future research directions that could result in improved assessment of the economic value of weather and climate forecasts.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.057
GPT teacher head0.178
Teacher spread0.121 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations302
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOxford University Press eBooksSame topicEconomic and Environmental ValuationFrench-language works237,207