3
$\begingroup$

Recently I started doing verification on daily temperature forecasts by different providers. I calculated the absolute forecast errors for each of the providers, and I am planning on performing ANOVA to check if the differences in mean absolute error between the providers is significant. So lets say that my sample consists of 110 maximum daily temperature forecast errors for 5 different providers. The forecasts errors are obtained as the difference between the actual temperature, obtained from the nearest weather reporting station and the forecasts by each of the providers.

What puzzles me here is the independence of the sample, since I use same set of actual temperature values to obtain the errors for each of the forecasts. The more I read about independence of samples the more I get confused. Is the independence assumption violated in this case?

Moreover, the distribution of the sample is nearly exponential, so I tried with transformation to approximate it to normal distribution. However, the normality significance tests indicate that the distribution is still non-normal, with a p-value of 0.01. How can I determine if the normality distribution assumption is not seriously violated, since I read on many threads that the test can be performed even if the normality assumption is moderately violated?

$\endgroup$

1 Answer 1

2
$\begingroup$

The assumptions of tests like ANOVA need to be assessed using knowledge about the science behind the data and how it was collected.

In your case I would expect that a one-way ANOVA is probably not the best approach due to non-independence. Think about if the forecasters are working from essentially the same information and there is an unexpectedly hot or cold day, all the forecasters are likely to be off by similar amounts for that day, so the values would not be independent.

The real requirement is conditional independence, meaning that if you can condition on what causes the dependence (the actual temperature) and assume independence after the conditioning, then the model will be fine. You could look into a randomized block design (with the date/observed temperature forming the blocks) or a mixed effects model (not for beginners, consult with a local statistician).

You might also want to think about what question you are trying to answer. What if one forecaster is usually 5 degrees to low, another forecaster is usually 5 degrees too high, and a third is usually off by 5 degrees, but sometimes too high and sometimes too low. All 3 have about the same average absolute difference, but are they really the same? This is a case where a difference in variances may be as interesting or more interesting than the difference in means. Figuring out which differences would be the most interesting, then finding the test to look for those differences is better than just figuring out if the assumptions of a common test hold.

$\endgroup$
10
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you very much for the response, it is quite helpful. Firstly i would like to ask you something about the randomized block design as it is again new issue for me:(... Particularly for this example, as far as i understood, the settings would be absolute errors as response variable, than the treatment ( factor ) variable would be my forecast providers (1,2,3,4,5) and the block variable could be the date ( dates for 110) days? Is it correct? $\endgroup$
    – Mari
    Commented May 21, 2013 at 18:09
  • $\begingroup$ Oh i forgot, regarding the part in which you mentioned what question i would like to answer, i was assessing the quality of forecast according to several measures, namely mean absolute error, root mean square error, mae skill score and number pf counts correct... $\endgroup$
    – Mari
    Commented May 21, 2013 at 18:32
  • $\begingroup$ Using these measures i got the impression which forecast provider is the most accurate, consistent, skilfull and which one has the highest mumber of correct forecast within range of 3 degrees... In many studies this is considered as enough for verification of weather forecasts... $\endgroup$
    – Mari
    Commented May 21, 2013 at 18:33
  • $\begingroup$ i just wanted to confirm the statistical significance of these findings and their effect possibly with confidence interval, which should be adjusted for non independence $\endgroup$
    – Mari
    Commented May 21, 2013 at 18:34
  • $\begingroup$ @user25925, it looks like you have put a lot of thought into the questions you want to answer and have addressed the main issues. Yes the randomized block would be done as you describe in the 1st comment and that should address the dependence issues. Focus on the tests/CIs of the treatment/providers for your inference with the blocking accounting for the dependence. $\endgroup$
    – Greg Snow
    Commented May 21, 2013 at 19:15

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.