In situ calibration of atmospheric air conductivity instruments

A new method of measuring the total conductivity of atmospheric air is described. It depends on determination of the electrical relaxation time of a horizontal wire, mounted between two insulators, which is initially grounded and then allowed to charge freely. The total air conductivity derived is compared with that from an ion mobility spectrometer. Results from the two techniques agreed to within 1.2 fS m(-1). (c) 2006 American Institute of Physics.

Calibration and use of a cesium-iodide prism in the infrared

With a cesium-iodide prism the long wavelength range of an infrared spectrometer may be extended to 55µ The use of such a prism, the choice of optical system, and the problems of stray radiation are all discussed. Accurate data are assembled for calibration in this region, and sample calibration traces are shown. A simple gas absorption cell is described for use at long wavelengths.

Some general comparative points on Chao’s and Zelterman’s estimators of population size

Two simple and frequently used capture–recapture estimates of the population size are compared: Chao's lower-bound estimate and Zelterman's estimate allowing for contaminated distributions. In the Poisson case it is shown that if there are only counts of ones and twos, the estimator of Zelterman is always bounded above by Chao's estimator. If counts larger than two exist, the estimator of Zelterman is becoming larger than that of Chao's, if only the ratio of the frequencies of counts of twos and ones is small enough. A similar analysis is provided for the binomial case. For a two-component mixture of Poisson distributions the asymptotic bias of both estimators is derived and it is shown that the Zelterman estimator can experience large overestimation bias. A modified Zelterman estimator is suggested and also the bias-corrected version of Chao's estimator is considered. All four estimators are compared in a simulation study.

Estimators in capture–recapture studies with two sources

This paper investigates the applications of capture–recapture methods to human populations. Capture–recapture methods are commonly used in estimating the size of wildlife populations but can also be used in epidemiology and social sciences, for estimating prevalence of a particular disease or the size of the homeless population in a certain area. Here we focus on estimating the prevalence of infectious diseases. Several estimators of population size are considered: the Lincoln–Petersen estimator and its modified version, the Chapman estimator, Chao’s lower bound estimator, the Zelterman’s estimator, McKendrick’s moment estimator and the maximum likelihood estimator. In order to evaluate these estimators, they are applied to real, three-source, capture-recapture data. By conditioning on each of the sources of three source data, we have been able to compare the estimators with the true value that they are estimating. The Chapman and Chao estimators were compared in terms of their relative bias. A variance formula derived through conditioning is suggested for Chao’s estimator, and normal 95% confidence intervals are calculated for this and the Chapman estimator. We then compare the coverage of the respective confidence intervals. Furthermore, a simulation study is included to compare Chao’s and Chapman’s estimator. Results indicate that Chao’s estimator is less biased than Chapman’s estimator unless both sources are independent. Chao’s estimator has also the smaller mean squared error. Finally, the implications and limitations of the above methods are discussed, with suggestions for further development.

A simple variance formula for population size estimators by conditioning

This note considers the variance estimation for population size estimators based on capture–recapture experiments. Whereas a diversity of estimators of the population size has been suggested, the question of estimating the associated variances is less frequently addressed. This note points out that the technique of conditioning can be applied here successfully which also allows us to identify sources of variation: the variance due to estimation of the model parameters and the binomial variance due to sampling n units from a population of size N. It is applied to estimators typically used in capture–recapture experiments in continuous time including the estimators of Zelterman and Chao and improves upon previously used variance estimators. In addition, knowledge of the variances associated with the estimators by Zelterman and Chao allows the suggestion of a new estimator as the weighted sum of the two. The decomposition of the variance into the two sources allows also a new understanding of how resampling techniques like the Bootstrap could be used appropriately. Finally, the sample size question for capture–recapture experiments is addressed. Since the variance of population size estimators increases with the sample size, it is suggested to use relative measures such as the observed-to-hidden ratio or the completeness of identification proportion for approaching the question of sample size choice.

Forecast calibration and combination: a simple Bayesian approach for ENSO

This study presents a new simple approach for combining empirical with raw (i.e., not bias corrected) coupled model ensemble forecasts in order to make more skillful interval forecasts of ENSO. A Bayesian normal model has been used to combine empirical and raw coupled model December SST Niño-3.4 index forecasts started at the end of the preceding July (5-month lead time). The empirical forecasts were obtained by linear regression between December and the preceding July Niño-3.4 index values over the period 1950–2001. Coupled model ensemble forecasts for the period 1987–99 were provided by ECMWF, as part of the Development of a European Multimodel Ensemble System for Seasonal to Interannual Prediction (DEMETER) project. Empirical and raw coupled model ensemble forecasts alone have similar mean absolute error forecast skill score, compared to climatological forecasts, of around 50% over the period 1987–99. The combined forecast gives an increased skill score of 74% and provides a well-calibrated and reliable estimate of forecast uncertainty.

Revisiting proportion estimators

Proportion estimators are quite frequently used in many application areas. The conventional proportion estimator (number of events divided by sample size) encounters a number of problems when the data are sparse as will be demonstrated in various settings. The problem of estimating its variance when sample sizes become small is rarely addressed in a satisfying framework. Specifically, we have in mind applications like the weighted risk difference in multicenter trials or stratifying risk ratio estimators (to adjust for potential confounders) in epidemiological studies. It is suggested to estimate p using the parametric family (see PDF for character) and p(1 - p) using (see PDF for character), where (see PDF for character). We investigate the estimation problem of choosing c 0 from various perspectives including minimizing the average mean squared error of (see PDF for character), average bias and average mean squared error of (see PDF for character). The optimal value of c for minimizing the average mean squared error of (see PDF for character) is found to be independent of n and equals c = 1. The optimal value of c for minimizing the average mean squared error of (see PDF for character) is found to be dependent of n with limiting value c = 0.833. This might justifiy to use a near-optimal value of c = 1 in practice which also turns out to be beneficial when constructing confidence intervals of the form (see PDF for character).

Some general comparative points on Chao's and Zelterman's estimators of the population size

Two simple and frequently used capture–recapture estimates of the population size are compared: Chao's lower-bound estimate and Zelterman's estimate allowing for contaminated distributions. In the Poisson case it is shown that if there are only counts of ones and twos, the estimator of Zelterman is always bounded above by Chao's estimator. If counts larger than two exist, the estimator of Zelterman is becoming larger than that of Chao's, if only the ratio of the frequencies of counts of twos and ones is small enough. A similar analysis is provided for the binomial case. For a two-component mixture of Poisson distributions the asymptotic bias of both estimators is derived and it is shown that the Zelterman estimator can experience large overestimation bias. A modified Zelterman estimator is suggested and also the bias-corrected version of Chao's estimator is considered. All four estimators are compared in a simulation study.

Estimators in capture-recapture studies with two sources

This paper investigates the applications of capture-recapture methods to human populations. Capture-recapture methods are commonly used in estimating the size of wildlife populations but can also be used in epidemiology and social sciences, for estimating prevalence of a particular disease or the size of the homeless population in a certain area. Here we focus on estimating the prevalence of infectious diseases. Several estimators of population size are considered: the Lincoln-Petersen estimator and its modified version, the Chapman estimator, Chao's lower bound estimator, the Zelterman's estimator, McKendrick's moment estimator and the maximum likelihood estimator. In order to evaluate these estimators, they are applied to real, three-source, capture-recapture data. By conditioning on each of the sources of three source data, we have been able to compare the estimators with the true value that they are estimating. The Chapman and Chao estimators were compared in terms of their relative bias. A variance formula derived through conditioning is suggested for Chao's estimator, and normal 95% confidence intervals are calculated for this and the Chapman estimator. We then compare the coverage of the respective confidence intervals. Furthermore, a simulation study is included to compare Chao's and Chapman's estimator. Results indicate that Chao's estimator is less biased than Chapman's estimator unless both sources are independent. Chao's estimator has also the smaller mean squared error. Finally, the implications and limitations of the above methods are discussed, with suggestions for further development.

A simple variance formula for population size estimators by conditioning

This note considers the variance estimation for population size estimators based on capture–recapture experiments. Whereas a diversity of estimators of the population size has been suggested, the question of estimating the associated variances is less frequently addressed. This note points out that the technique of conditioning can be applied here successfully which also allows us to identify sources of variation: the variance due to estimation of the model parameters and the binomial variance due to sampling n units from a population of size N. It is applied to estimators typically used in capture–recapture experiments in continuous time including the estimators of Zelterman and Chao and improves upon previously used variance estimators. In addition, knowledge of the variances associated with the estimators by Zelterman and Chao allows the suggestion of a new estimator as the weighted sum of the two. The decomposition of the variance into the two sources allows also a new understanding of how resampling techniques like the Bootstrap could be used appropriately. Finally, the sample size question for capture–recapture experiments is addressed. Since the variance of population size estimators increases with the sample size, it is suggested to use relative measures such as the observed-to-hidden ratio or the completeness of identification proportion for approaching the question of sample size choice.

Automatic internal calibration in liquid chromatography/Fourier transform ion cyclotron resonance mass spectrometry of protein digests

Accurately measured peptide masses can be used for large-scale protein identification from bacterial whole-cell digests as an alternative to tandem mass spectrometry (MS/MS) provided mass measurement errors of a few parts-per-million (ppm) are obtained. Fourier transform ion cyclotron resonance (FTICR) mass spectrometry (MS) routinely achieves such mass accuracy either with internal calibration or by regulating the charge in the analyzer cell. We have developed a novel and automated method for internal calibration of liquid chromatography (LC)/FTICR data from whole-cell digests using peptides in the sample identified by concurrent MS/MS together with ambient polydimethyl-cyclosiloxanes as internal calibrants in the mass spectra. The method reduced mass measurement error from 4.3 +/- 3.7 ppm to 0.3 +/- 2.3 ppm in an E. coli LC/FTICR dataset of 1000 MS and MS/MS spectra and is applicable to all analyses of complex protein digests by FTICRMS. Copyright (c) 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

An automated calibration method for non-see-through head mounted displays

Accurate calibration of a head mounted display (HMD) is essential both for research on the visual system and for realistic interaction with virtual objects. Yet, existing calibration methods are time consuming and depend on human judgements, making them error prone. The methods are also limited to optical see-through HMDs. Building on our existing HMD calibration method [1], we show here how it is possible to calibrate a non-see-through HMD. A camera is placed inside an HMD displaying an image of a regular grid, which is captured by the camera. The HMD is then removed and the camera, which remains fixed in position, is used to capture images of a tracked calibration object in various positions. The locations of image features on the calibration object are then re-expressed in relation to the HMD grid. This allows established camera calibration techniques to be used to recover estimates of the display’s intrinsic parameters (width, height, focal length) and extrinsic parameters (optic centre and orientation of the principal ray). We calibrated a HMD in this manner in both see-through and in non-see-through modes and report the magnitude of the errors between real image features and reprojected features. Our calibration method produces low reprojection errors and involves no error-prone human measurements.