 |
| Titel |
A cautionary note regarding comparisons of fire danger indices |
| VerfasserIn |
C. S. Eastaugh, A. Arpaci, H. Vacik |
| Medientyp |
Artikel
|
| Sprache |
Englisch
|
| ISSN |
1561-8633
|
| Digitales Dokument |
URL |
| Erschienen |
In: Natural Hazards and Earth System Science ; 12, no. 4 ; Nr. 12, no. 4 (2012-04-12), S.927-934 |
| Datensatznummer |
250010692
|
| Publikation (Nr.) |
 copernicus.org/nhess-12-927-2012.pdf |
|
|
|
|
|
| Zusammenfassung |
| Over the past decade, several methods have been used to compare the
performance of fire danger indices in an effort to find the most
appropriate indices for particular regions or circumstances. Various authors
have proposed comparators and demonstrated different responses of indices to
their tests, but rarely has much effort been put into demonstrating the
validity of the comparators themselves. We present a demonstration that many
of the published comparators are sensitive to the different frequency
distributions, that may be inherent in the performance of the different
indices, and outline a non-parametric method that may be useful for future
work. We compare four hypothetical fire danger indices, three of which are
simple mathematical transformations of each other. The hypothesis tested is
that the comparators often used in such studies may indicate spurious
performance differences between these indices, which is found to be the
case. Non-parametric methods are robust to differences in index value
frequency distribution and may allow more valid comparisons of fire danger
indices. The new comparison method is shown to have advantages over other
non-parametric comparators. |
| |
|
| Teil von |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|