Das Suchergebnis hat sich seit Ihrer Suchanfrage verändert. Eventuell werden Dokumente in anderer Reihenfolge angezeigt.
  • Treffer 89 von 2519
Zurück zur Trefferliste

On trend detection

  • A main obstacle to trend detection in time series occurs when they are autocorrelated. By reducing the effective sample size of a series, autocorrelation leads to decreased trend significance. Numerous recipes attempt to mitigate the effect of autocorrelation, either by adjusting for the reduced effective sample size or by removing the autocorrelated components of a series. This short note deals with the latter, also called prewhitening (PW). It is known that removal of autocorrelation also removes part of the trend, which may affect the signal-to-noise ratio. Two popular methods have dealt with this problem, the trend-free prewhitening (TFPW) and the iterative prewhitening. Although it is generally accepted that both methods reduce the adverse effects of PW on the trend magnitude, corresponding effects on statistical significance have not been clearly stated for TFPW. Using a Monte Carlo approach, it is demonstrated that both methods entail quite different Type-I error rates. The iterative prewhitening produces rates that areA main obstacle to trend detection in time series occurs when they are autocorrelated. By reducing the effective sample size of a series, autocorrelation leads to decreased trend significance. Numerous recipes attempt to mitigate the effect of autocorrelation, either by adjusting for the reduced effective sample size or by removing the autocorrelated components of a series. This short note deals with the latter, also called prewhitening (PW). It is known that removal of autocorrelation also removes part of the trend, which may affect the signal-to-noise ratio. Two popular methods have dealt with this problem, the trend-free prewhitening (TFPW) and the iterative prewhitening. Although it is generally accepted that both methods reduce the adverse effects of PW on the trend magnitude, corresponding effects on statistical significance have not been clearly stated for TFPW. Using a Monte Carlo approach, it is demonstrated that both methods entail quite different Type-I error rates. The iterative prewhitening produces rates that are generally close to the nominal significance level. The TFPW, however, shows very high Type-I error rates with increasing autocorrelation. The corresponding rate of false trend detections is unacceptable for applications, so that published trends based on TFPW need to be reassessed.zeige mehrzeige weniger

Metadaten exportieren

Weitere Dienste

Suche bei Google Scholar Statistik - Anzahl der Zugriffe auf das Dokument
Metadaten
Verfasserangaben:Gerhard Bürger
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.11280
ISSN:0885-6087
ISSN:1099-1085
Titel des übergeordneten Werks (Englisch):Hydrological processes
Verlag:Wiley
Verlagsort:Hoboken
Publikationstyp:Wissenschaftlicher Artikel
Sprache:Englisch
Jahr der Erstveröffentlichung:2017
Erscheinungsjahr:2017
Datum der Freischaltung:20.04.2020
Freies Schlagwort / Tag:Type-I error; autocorrelation; trend significance
Band:31
Seitenanzahl:4
Erste Seite:4039
Letzte Seite:4042
Organisationseinheiten:Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Fakultät / Institut für Geowissenschaften
Peer Review:Referiert
Name der Einrichtung zum Zeitpunkt der Publikation:Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Fakultät / Institut für Erd- und Umweltwissenschaften
Verstanden ✔
Diese Webseite verwendet technisch erforderliche Session-Cookies. Durch die weitere Nutzung der Webseite stimmen Sie diesem zu. Unsere Datenschutzerklärung finden Sie hier.