Evaluation of suitable spectral intervals for near-IR laboratory detection of water vapour continuum absorption

The water vapour continuum absorption is an important component of molecular absorption of radiation in atmosphere. However, uncertainty in knowledge of the value of the continuum absorption at present can achieve 100% in different spectral regions leading to an error in flux calculation up to 3-5 W/m2 global mean. This work uses line-by-line calculations to reveal the best spectral intervals for experimental verification of the CKD water vapour continuum models in the currently least studied near-infrared spectral region. Possible sources of errors in continuum retrieval taken into account in the simulation include the sensitivity of laboratory spectrometers and uncertainties in the spectral line parameters in HITRAN-2004 and Schwenke-Partridge database. It is shown that a number of micro-windows in near-IR can be used at present for laboratory detection of the water vapour continuum with estimated accuracy from 30 to 5%.

Bootstrapping prediction intervals for autoregressive models

Methods of improving the coverage of Box–Jenkins prediction intervals for linear autoregressive models are explored. These methods use bootstrap techniques to allow for parameter estimation uncertainty and to reduce the small-sample bias in the estimator of the models’ parameters. In addition, we also consider a method of bias-correcting the non-linear functions of the parameter estimates that are used to generate conditional multi-step predictions.

Bootstrap prediction intervals for autoregressive time series

The calculation of interval forecasts for highly persistent autoregressive (AR) time series based on the bootstrap is considered. Three methods are considered for countering the small-sample bias of least-squares estimation for processes which have roots close to the unit circle: a bootstrap bias-corrected OLS estimator; the use of the Roy–Fuller estimator in place of OLS; and the use of the Andrews–Chen estimator in place of OLS. All three methods of bias correction yield superior results to the bootstrap in the absence of bias correction. Of the three correction methods, the bootstrap prediction intervals based on the Roy–Fuller estimator are generally superior to the other two. The small-sample performance of bootstrap prediction intervals based on the Roy–Fuller estimator are investigated when the order of the AR model is unknown, and has to be determined using an information criterion.

A comparison of methods for constructing confidence intervals after phase II/III clinical trials

Recently, in order to accelerate drug development, trials that use adaptive seamless designs such as phase II/III clinical trials have been proposed. Phase II/III clinical trials combine traditional phases II and III into a single trial that is conducted in two stages. Using stage 1 data, an interim analysis is performed to answer phase II objectives and after collection of stage 2 data, a final confirmatory analysis is performed to answer phase III objectives. In this paper we consider phase II/III clinical trials in which, at stage 1, several experimental treatments are compared to a control and the apparently most effective experimental treatment is selected to continue to stage 2. Although these trials are attractive because the confirmatory analysis includes phase II data from stage 1, the inference methods used for trials that compare a single experimental treatment to a control and do not have an interim analysis are no longer appropriate. Several methods for analysing phase II/III clinical trials have been developed. These methods are recent and so there is little literature on extensive comparisons of their characteristics. In this paper we review and compare the various methods available for constructing confidence intervals after phase II/III clinical trials.