Hi Lars,

I raised a very similar question a couple of years ago:
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/2014/057605.html

The outcome was inconclusive. One suggestion was to add a Boolean attribute 
that indicated whether the threshold value was included or not. Others thought 
that adding more standard names was the way to go, while others thought that a 
single name was sufficient.

I encourage you to read through the rest of the thread and see if it helps with 
your current request:
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/2014/thread.html#57605

For info, we continue to use the existing standard names even though they do 
not strictly match the definitions of our 'days of rain' statistics.

Regards,

Dan


Dan Hollis   Climatologist
Met Office   Hadley Centre   FitzRoy Road   Exeter   Devon   EX1 3PB   United 
Kingdom
Tel: +44 (0)1392 884535   Mob: +44 (0)7342058682   Fax: +44 (0)1392 885681
E-mail: [email protected]   Website: http://www.metoffice.gov.uk
For UK climate and past weather information, visit 
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate


-----Original Message-----
From: CF-metadata [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of 
Bärring Lars
Sent: 24 March 2017 08:10
To: [email protected]
Subject: [CF-metadata] Request for new standard names for climatological 
statistics based on thresholds

Dear all,
 
Several standard names oriented towards climate indices for various impacts are 
based on thresholds, and the standard name includes the construct 
"..._above_threshold" or "..._below_threshold".  However, several 
well-established climate indices use non-strict inequalities in their 
definition. 
 
For model output using floating point precision the difference between using a 
strict and a non-strict inequality is small or even negligible, but for 
observational data discretized to some limited precision (typically one or no 
decimal digit) this makes a difference. 
 
At a workshop last week people involved in WMO/CCl Expert Team on 
Sector-specific Climate Indices (ET-SCI) and the joint CCl/WCRP/JCOMM Expert 
Team on Climate Change Detection and Indices (ETCCDI), as well as the European 
ECA&D programme and several research projects discussed this. 
 
The outcome of these discussions is to suggest new standard names similar to 
the existing ones but using the contructs "..._at_or_above_threshold" and 
"..._at_or_below_threshold". In all other respects these new standard names 
should be patterned after the following existing ones:
 
number_of_days_with_air_temperature_above_threshold
number_of_days_with_air_temperature_below_threshold
number_of_days_with_lwe_thickness_of_precipitation_amount_above_threshold
number_of_days_with_surface_temperature_below_threshold
number_of_days_with_wind_speed_above_threshold
spell_length_of_days_with_air_temperature_above_threshold
spell_length_of_days_with_air_temperature_below_threshold
spell_length_of_days_with_lwe_thickness_of_precipitation_amount_above_threshold
spell_length_of_days_with_lwe_thickness_of_precipitation_amount_below_threshold
 
The specific use cases for these extension are several ET-SCI defined indices 
that involves non-strict inequalities. 
 
The alternative of changing the ET-SCI definitions to use a strict inequality 
is not an option because they have been painstakingly defined in collaboration 
with user communities and/or are directly related to well-established 
operational usage. 
 
Likewise, to just adjust the threshold in order to turn the non-strict 
inequality to a strict equality (say from 30 C to 29.9 C or 29.99 C or ...) is 
not attractive and prone to cause confusion.
 
Kind regards,
Lars

--
Lars Bärring

FDr, Forskare
PhD, Research Scientist

SMHI  /  Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute Rossby Centre SE - 
601 76 NORRKÖPING http://www.smhi.se

E-post / Email: [email protected]
Tel / Phone: +46 (0)11 495 8604
Fax: +46 (0)11 495 8001
Besöksadress / Visiting address: Folkborgsvägen 17


_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata
_______________________________________________
CF-metadata mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/cf-metadata

Reply via email to