toggle visibility Search & Display Options

Select All    Deselect All
 |   | 
Details
   print
  Records Links
Author Liu, B.; Asseng, S.; Müller, C.; Ewert, F.; Elliott, J.; Lobell, D. B.; Martre, P.; Ruane, A. C.; Wallach, D.; Jones, J. W.; Rosenzweig, C.; Aggarwal, P. K.; Alderman, P. D.; Anothai, J.; Basso, B.; Biernath, C.; Cammarano, D.; Challinor, A.; Deryng, D.; Sanctis, G. D.; Doltra, J.; Fereres, E.; Folberth, C.; Garcia-Vila, M.; Gayler, S.; Hoogenboom, G.; Hunt, L. A.; Izaurralde, R. C.; Jabloun, M.; Jones, C. D.; Kersebaum, K. C.; Kimball, B. A.; Koehler, A.-K.; Kumar, S. N.; Nendel, C.; O’Leary, G. J.; Olesen, J. E.; Ottman, M. J.; Palosuo, T.; Prasad, P. V. V.; Priesack, E.; Pugh, T. A. M.; Reynolds, M.; Rezaei, E. E.; Rötter, R. P.; Schmid, E.; Semenov, M. A.; Shcherbak, I.; Stehfest, E.; Stöckle, C. O.; Stratonovitch, P.; Streck, T.; Supit, I.; Tao, F.; Thorburn, P.; Waha, K.; Wall, G. W.; Wang, E.; White, J. W.; Wolf, J.; Zhao, Z.; Zhu, Y. url  doi
openurl 
  Title Similar estimates of temperature impacts on global wheat yield by three independent methods Type Journal Article
  Year 2016 Publication Nature Climate Change Abbreviated Journal Nat. Clim. Change  
  Volume 6 Issue 12 Pages 1130-1136  
  Keywords  
  Abstract (up)  
  Address  
  Corporate Author Thesis  
  Publisher Place of Publication Editor  
  Language Summary Language Original Title  
  Series Editor Series Title Abbreviated Series Title  
  Series Volume Series Issue Edition  
  ISSN 1758-678x ISBN Medium article  
  Area Expedition Conference  
  Notes CropM Approved no  
  Call Number MA @ admin @ Serial 4965  
Permanent link to this record
 

 
Author Acharya, T.; Fanzo, J.; Gustafson, D.; Ingram, J.; Schneeman, B.; Allen, L.; Boote, K.; Drewnowski, A.; Ewert, F.; Hall, S.; Hendley, P.; Howden, M.; Janssen, S.; Jones, J.; Latulippe, M.; Lotze-Campen, H.; McDermott, J.; Meijl, H.V.; Nelson, G.; Newsome, R.; Roulin, A.; Scholes, B.; Tanumihardjo, S.; Tavill, G.; van der Mensbrugghe, D.; Wiebe, K. url  openurl
  Title Assessing Sustainable Nutrition Security: The Role of Food Systems: Working Paper Type Report
  Year 2014 Publication Abbreviated Journal  
  Volume Issue Pages  
  Keywords ftnotmacsur  
  Abstract (up)  
  Address  
  Corporate Author Thesis  
  Publisher Place of Publication Washington, D.C., U.S.A. Editor  
  Language Summary Language Original Title  
  Series Editor ILSI Research Foundation: Center for Integrated Modeling of Sustainable Agriculture and Nutrition Security Series Title Abbreviated Series Title  
  Series Volume Series Issue Edition  
  ISSN ISBN Medium  
  Area Expedition Conference  
  Notes TradeM Approved no  
  Call Number MA @ admin @ Serial 4995  
Permanent link to this record
 

 
Author Wallach, D.; Thorburn, P.; Asseng, S.; Challinor, A.J.; Ewert, F.; Jones, J.W.; Rötter, R.; Ruane, A. url  doi
openurl 
  Title Estimating model prediction error: Should you treat predictions as fixed or random Type Journal Article
  Year 2016 Publication Environmental Modelling & Software Abbreviated Journal Env. Model. Softw.  
  Volume 84 Issue Pages 529-539  
  Keywords Crop model; Uncertainty; Prediction error; Parameter uncertainty; Input uncertainty; Model structure uncertainty  
  Abstract (up) Crop models are important tools for impact assessment of climate change, as well as for exploring management options under current climate. It is essential to evaluate the uncertainty associated with predictions of these models. We compare two criteria of prediction error; MSEPfixed, which evaluates mean squared error of prediction for a model with fixed structure, parameters and inputs, and MSEPuncertain(X), which evaluates mean squared error averaged over the distributions of model structure, inputs and parameters. Comparison of model outputs with data can be used to estimate the former. The latter has a squared bias term, which can be estimated using hindcasts, and a model variance term, which can be estimated from a simulation experiment. The separate contributions to MSEPuncertain(X) can be estimated using a random effects ANOVA. It is argued that MSEPuncertain(X) is the more informative uncertainty criterion, because it is specific to each prediction situation.  
  Address  
  Corporate Author Thesis  
  Publisher Place of Publication Editor  
  Language English Summary Language Original Title  
  Series Editor Series Title Abbreviated Series Title  
  Series Volume Series Issue Edition  
  ISSN 1364-8152 ISBN Medium Article  
  Area Expedition Conference  
  Notes CropM, ft_macsur Approved no  
  Call Number MA @ admin @ Serial 4773  
Permanent link to this record
 

 
Author Wallach, D.; Thorburn, P.; Asseng, S.; Challinor, A.J.; Ewert, F.; Jones, J.W.; Rötter, R.; Ruane, A. url  openurl
  Title Overview paper on comprehensive framework for assessment of error and uncertainty in crop model predictions Type Report
  Year 2016 Publication FACCE MACSUR Reports Abbreviated Journal  
  Volume 8 Issue Pages C4.1-D  
  Keywords MACSUR_ACK; CropM  
  Abstract (up) Crop models are important tools for impact assessment of climate change, as well as for  exploring management options under current climate. It is essential to evaluate the  uncertainty associated with predictions of these models. Several ways of quantifying  prediction uncertainty have been explored in the literature, but there have been no  studies of how the different approaches are related to one another, and how they are  related to some overall measure of prediction uncertainty. Here we show that all the  different approaches can be related to two different viewpoints about the model; either  the model is treated as a fixed predictor with some average error, or the model can be  treated as a random variable with uncertainty in one or more of model structure, model  inputs and model parameters. We discuss the differences, and show how mean squared  error of prediction can be estimated in both cases. The results can be used to put  uncertainty estimates into a more general framework and to relate different uncertainty  estimates to one another and to overall prediction uncertainty. This should lead to a  better understanding of crop model prediction uncertainty and the underlying causes of  that uncertainty. This study was published as (Wallach et al. 2016)  
  Address  
  Corporate Author Thesis  
  Publisher Place of Publication Editor  
  Language Summary Language Original Title  
  Series Editor Series Title Abbreviated Series Title  
  Series Volume Series Issue Edition  
  ISSN ISBN Medium  
  Area Expedition Conference  
  Notes Approved no  
  Call Number MA @ office @ Serial 2954  
Permanent link to this record
 

 
Author Boote, K.J.; Porter, C.; Jones, J.W.; Thorburn, P.J.; Kersebaum, K.C.; Hoogenboom, G.; White, J.W.; Hatfield, J.L. doi  openurl
  Title Sentinel site data for crop model improvement—definition and characterization Type Book Chapter
  Year 2016 Publication Improving Modeling Tools to Assess Climate Change Effects on Crop Response Abbreviated Journal  
  Volume Issue Pages  
  Keywords  
  Abstract (up) Crop models are increasingly being used to assess the impacts of future climate change on production and food security. High quality, site-specific data on weather, soils, management, and cultivar are needed for those model applications. Also important is that model development, evaluation, improvement, and calibration require additional high quality, site-specific measurements on crop yield, growth, phenology, and ancillary traits. We review the evolution of minimum data set requirements for agroecosystem modeling and then describe the characteristics and ranking of sentinel site data needed for crop model improvement, calibration, and application. We in the Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project (AgMIP), propose to rank sentinel site data sets as platinum, gold, silver, and copper, based on the degree of true site-specific measurement of weather, soils, management, crop yield, as well as the quality, comprehensiveness, quantity, accuracy, and value. For example, to be ranked platinum, the weather and soil characterization must be measured on-site, and all management inputs must be known. Dataset ranking will be lower for weather measured off-site or soil traits estimated from soil mapping. Ranking also depends on the intended purposes for data use. If the purpose is to improve a crop model for response to water or N, then additional observations are necessary, such as initial soil water, initial soil inorganic N, and plant N uptake during the growing season to be ranked platinum. Rankings are enhanced by presence of multiple treatments and sites. Examples of platinum-, gold-, and silver-quality data sets for model improvement and calibration uses are illustrated.  
  Address  
  Corporate Author Thesis  
  Publisher Place of Publication Editor Hatfield, J.L.; Fleisher, D.  
  Language Summary Language Original Title  
  Series Editor Series Title Advances in Agricultural Systems Modeling Abbreviated Series Title  
  Series Volume 7 Series Issue Edition  
  ISSN ISBN Medium  
  Area Expedition Conference  
  Notes CropM Approved no  
  Call Number MA @ admin @ Serial 4980  
Permanent link to this record
Select All    Deselect All
 |   | 
Details
   print

Save Citations:
Export Records: