English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

There is an increasing interest in the question of what might be the appropriate future role for the human in the forecast process. It is asserted that computer-generated forecasts are unable (by themselves) to fully replicate the decision-making processes of human forecasters. Similarly, it is also asserted that human forecasters are unable (by themselves) to optimally integrate into the forecasting process, guidance from computer-generated predictions. However, there is the accepted mathematical concept that two or more inaccurate but independent predictions of the same future events may be combined to yield predictions that are, on the average, more accurate than either of them taken individually. Automated and human forecasts might be expected to bring to the table different knowledge sets, and this suggests the development of a weather forecasting system that mechanically combines human and computer-generated predictions. This paper reports on the evaluation of a knowledge based system, modified in order to mechanically combine human and computer-generated predictions. The system's output is firstly evaluated over a "real-time" trial of 100 days duration. The trial reveals that forecasts generated by mechanically combining the predictions explain 7.7% additional variance of weather (rainfall amount, sensible weather, minimum temperature, and maximum temperature) over that explained by the human (official) forecasts. In the light of the results of the 100-day trial, a number of minor modifications are made to the system and the trial is then continued. After 365 Day-1 to Day-7 forecasts, that is, 2555 individual predictions, the average lift in percentage variance of weather explained is 7.9% over that explained by the current official forecasts. With computer-generated forecasts unable to fully incorporate human forecasters' valuable domain and contextual knowledge, there should be a need for the human forecaster well into the future. That future role may be as an input to a system that mechanically combines human predictions with computer-generated forecasts.

ssrn electronic journal

The Future Role of Humans in the Weather Forecasting Process - To Provide Input to a System that Mechanically Integrates Judgmental (Human) and Automated Predictions?