Re: TEC prediction failure
Posted by Roger Hunter on December 27, 2012 at 20:00:05:

Brian;

> OK. Here's another scenario - prediction for 4+ Los Angeles in a specified time window. How do you evaluate a hit or miss with such a vague location?

You can't.

> I'm looking for a way to do so. To me it's obvious that an M4 would have to be closer to LA to consider it a hit than an M8. But where do you draw the line?

Why? Who needs predictions that vague? What good are they?

> Just looking for a way to evaluate fuzzy predictions.

The goal is to find good predictors, not encourage the clueless.

Roger


Follow Ups:
     ● Re: TEC prediction failure - Skywise  20:05:00 - 12/27/2012  (80931)  (1)
        ● Re: TEC prediction failure - Roger Hunter  20:10:55 - 12/27/2012  (80932)  (1)
           ● Re: TEC prediction failure - Skywise  20:58:37 - 12/27/2012  (80933)  (2)
              ● On the importance of mag. - Roger Hunter  09:09:53 - 12/28/2012  (80937)  (1)
                 ● Re: On the importance of mag. - Amit  03:44:01 - 12/29/2012  (80940)  (1)
                    ● Re: On the importance of mag. - Roger Hunter  07:07:39 - 12/29/2012  (80941)  (1)
                       ● Re: On the importance of mag. - Amit  01:29:16 - 12/30/2012  (80949)  (1)
                          ● Re: On the importance of mag. - Roger Hunter  07:02:39 - 12/30/2012  (80950)  (0)
              ● Re: TEC prediction failure - Roger Hunter  08:17:27 - 12/28/2012  (80934)  (3)
                 ● Re: TEC prediction failure - Skywise  12:54:15 - 12/28/2012  (80938)  (1)
                    ● Re: TEC prediction failure - Roger Hunter  13:13:17 - 12/28/2012  (80939)  (0)
                 ● Re: Evaluation rules - Roger Hunter  08:34:40 - 12/28/2012  (80936)  (0)
                 ● Re: Evaluatipon rules - Roger Hunter  08:34:18 - 12/28/2012  (80935)  (0)