MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Economic Value of Weather and Climate Forecasts

2012· book-chapter· en· W2155094271 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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