2017-11-03, 12:23
Hi All
I'm very new to this but it seems that there are probably very few stations with the same characteristics which makes a comparison difficult if not impossible.
The only thing constant for all stations is a particular stroke.
So what if we could analyse by looking at who is watching what. In other words use only the signals from the same cluster of storms and then further analyse by range bands from the storms. If only one (or clustered) storm is used the distortion of data from those stations able to pick up signals from two or more storms would be eliminated. I suggest a formula something like:- Stations in range of storm A 0 - 500K "My detections / Mean of all detections" and the same for increasing range bands. It doesn't eliminate false detections but at least it tries to demonstrate how a station is performing in relation to the same events compared to its peers. Stations below the mean should perhaps adjust whilst those very much above the mean could expect false detections.
I'm no statistician so maybe this is too simplistic approach but I hope it is thinking out of the box.
Regards
Alan
I'm very new to this but it seems that there are probably very few stations with the same characteristics which makes a comparison difficult if not impossible.
The only thing constant for all stations is a particular stroke.
So what if we could analyse by looking at who is watching what. In other words use only the signals from the same cluster of storms and then further analyse by range bands from the storms. If only one (or clustered) storm is used the distortion of data from those stations able to pick up signals from two or more storms would be eliminated. I suggest a formula something like:- Stations in range of storm A 0 - 500K "My detections / Mean of all detections" and the same for increasing range bands. It doesn't eliminate false detections but at least it tries to demonstrate how a station is performing in relation to the same events compared to its peers. Stations below the mean should perhaps adjust whilst those very much above the mean could expect false detections.
I'm no statistician so maybe this is too simplistic approach but I hope it is thinking out of the box.
Regards
Alan
Stations: 2004