Risk and Uncertainty
This is an overview of the topics we'll cover in today's lecture. The italics around the last topic reflect that it's an "optional" topic that we may get to if time allows.
Climate risk: "risk" created or enhanced by the impacts of climate change
Climate risk: "risk" created or enhanced by the impacts of climate change
Strong interactions between these impacts and broader socioeconomic dynamics results in complex dynamics.
Climate change impacts the intensity, frequency, and duration of a variety of hazards, affecting a large number of sectors. There is certainly a lot of spatial and temporal variability to these changes, but they are highly uncertain, for a number of reasons. Despite this uncertainty, we have to make decisions about how to manage these risks on relatively short time scales.
This map actually understates things by focusing on an estimate of the "top" risk in a given location, and there can be a number of compounding effects from multiple stressors. More on that later.
Common framework:
Risk as a combination of
Source: Simpson et al (2021)
Climate Risk: Changes in risk stemming from the impacts of or response to climate change.
Climate Risk: Changes in risk stemming from the impacts of or response to climate change.
Hazards
Exposure/Vulnerability
Uncertainty enters into the hazard-exposure-vulnerability-response model in a few ways:
What exactly do we mean by uncertainty?
Glib answer: Uncertainty is a lack of certainty!
What exactly do we mean by uncertainty?
Glib answer: Uncertainty is a lack of certainty!
Maybe better: Uncertainty refers to an inability to exactly describe current or future states.
The lines between aleatory and epistemic uncertainty are not always clear! This has implications for modeling and risk analysis.
We often represent or describe uncertainties in terms of probabilities:
The difference between the frequentist and Bayesian perspectives can be illustrated through the difference in how both conceptualize uncertainty in estimates.
A Bayesian credible interval for some random quantity is conceptually straightforward:
An
Source: Wikipedia
However, this notion breaks down with the frequentist viewpoint: there is some "true value" for the associated estimate based on long-run frequencies.
With this view, it is incoherent to talk about probabilities corresponding to parameters. Instead, the key question is how frequently (based on repeated analyses of different datasets) your estimates are "correct".
In other words, the confidence level
So for a 95% confidence interval, there is a 5% chance that a given sample was an outlier and the interval is inaccurate.
To understand frequentist confidence intervals, think of horseshoes! The post is a fixed target, and my accuracy as a horseshoe thrower captures how confident I am that I will hit the target with any given toss.
Source: https://www.wikihow.com/Throw-a-Horseshoe
But once I make the throw, I've either hit or missed.
Generating a confidence interval is like throwing a horseshoe with a certain (pre-experimental) degree of accuracy.
Source: https://www.wikihow.com/Throw-a-Horseshoe
Probabilities are often represented using a probability distribution, which are parameterized by a probability density function.
A key consideration in uncertainty and risk analysis is defining an appropriate probability model for the data.
Many "default" approaches, such as linear regression, assume normal distributions and independent and identically-distributed residuals.
Some typical ways in which these assumptions can fail:
Some typical ways in which these assumptions can fail:
Some typical ways in which these assumptions can fail:
How can we know if a proposed probability model is appropriate for a data set?
Visual inspection often breaks down: our brains are very good at imposing structure (look up "gestalt principles").
One useful tool is a quantile-quantile (Q-Q) plot, which compares quantiles of two distributions.
If the quantiles match, the points will be roughly along the diagonal line, e.g. this comparison of normally-distributed data with a normal distribution.
If the points are below/above the 1:1 line, the theoretical distribution is over/under-predicting the associated quantiles.
Q-Q plots show similar information to a Cumulative Distribution Function (CDF) plot.
Another critical question is if the samples are correlated or independent. For a time series, this can be tested using autocorrelation (or cross-correlation for multiple variables).
Specifying the probability model is important — getting this too wrong can bias resulting inferences and projections.
There's no black-box workflow for this: try exploring different methods, relying on domain knowledge, and looking at different specifications until you convince yourself something makes sense.
A common problem in risk/uncertainty analysis is uncertainty propagation: what is the impact of input uncertainties on system outcomes? The most basic way to approach this is through Monte Carlo simulation.
Monte Carlo simulation involves:
Monte Carlo simulation involves:
Note that steps 1 and 2 require the ability to generate data from the probability model (or we say that the model is generative). This is not always the case!
Monte Carlo is a very useful method for calculating complex and high-dimensional integrals (such as expected values), since an integral is an
We can formalize this common use of Monte Carlo as the computation of the expected value of a random quantity
Generate
Monte Carlo works because of the large of law numbers:
If
Then by the strong law of large numbers:
Notice that the sample mean
With some assumptions (the mean of
This means that the Monte Carlo estimate is an unbiased estimate of the mean.
The basic Monte Carlo algorithm is straightforward: draw a large enough set of samples from your input distribution, simulate and/or compute your test statistic for each of those samples, and the sample value will necessarily converge to the population value.
However:
This raises a key question: how can we quantify the standard error of a Monte Carlo estimate?
The variance of this estimator is:
So the standard error
In other words, if we want to decrease the Monte Carlo error by 10x, we need 100x additional samples. This is not an ideal method for high levels of accuracy.
Monte Carlo is an extremely bad method. It should only be used when all alternative methods are worse.
— Sokal, Monte Carlo Methods in Statistical Mechanics, 1996
In other words, if we want to decrease the Monte Carlo error by 10x, we need 100x additional samples. This is not an ideal method for high levels of accuracy.
Monte Carlo is an extremely bad method. It should only be used when all alternative methods are worse.
— Sokal, Monte Carlo Methods in Statistical Mechanics, 1996
The thing is, though – for a lot of problems, all alternative methods are worse!
An
To estimate confidence intervals, we can rely on the variance estimate from before.
For "sufficiently large" sample sizes
This means that we can construct confidence intervals using the inverse cumulative distribution function for the normal distribution.
The
For example, the 95% CI is
Of course, we typically don't know
But this gives us a sense of how many more samples we might need to get a more precise estimate.
What is the probability of rolling 4 dice for a total of 19?
Let's solve this using Monte Carlo.
What is the probability of rolling 4 dice for a total of 19?
Let's solve this using Monte Carlo.
How does this estimate evolve as we add more samples?
Note: the true value (given by the red line) is 4.32%.
We won't spend too much more time here, but for more complex problems, the sample size needed to constrain the Monte Carlo error can be computationally burdensome.
This is typically addressed with more sophisticated sampling schemes which are designed to reduce the variance from random sampling, causing the estimate to converge faster.
Wednesday: Discuss Simpson (2021) and lab on testing for normality and Monte Carlo (featuring The Price is Right!).
Next Monday: Representing climate uncertainties and implications for risk management.
Keyboard shortcuts
↑, ←, Pg Up, k | Go to previous slide |
↓, →, Pg Dn, Space, j | Go to next slide |
Home | Go to first slide |
End | Go to last slide |
Number + Return | Go to specific slide |
b / m / f | Toggle blackout / mirrored / fullscreen mode |
c | Clone slideshow |
p | Toggle presenter mode |
t | Restart the presentation timer |
?, h | Toggle this help |
Esc | Back to slideshow |