PPT-Model Evaluation Tools

MET What is MET Model Evaluation Tools MET a powerful and highly configurable verification package developed by DTC offering Standard verification scores comparing gridded model data to pointbased observations. a multisurface complexation reactive transport model on field data. . Bert-Jan Groenenberg. 1. , Joris Dijkstra. 2. , . Rob . Comans. 2,3. 1. Alterra . Wageningen UR; . 2 . ECN; . . 3 . Wageningen University. November 2010, Lyon. Fabio Paternò. CNR-ISTI, HIIS Laboratory. Pisa, Italy. http://giove.isti.cnr.it. 2. Model-based approaches. Allow. . designers. and . developers. . to. concentrate on . main. Introduction to a 4 step evaluation approach. What. is the evaluation resource pack?. The evaluation resource pack is a comprehensive and user-friendly slide-show. w. hich provides. . step by step evaluation guidance and resources. It was produced. Metrics for Performance Evaluation. How to evaluate the performance of a model?. Methods for Performance Evaluation. How to obtain reliable estimates?. Methods for Model Comparison. How to compare the relative performance . Teacher Evaluation Work Group. Model Feedback and Revision. November 27. th. , 2012. “Leading for educational excellence and equity. Every day for every one.”. Meeting Updates. TODAY:. Networking via Hope Street Group website. Uijtdehaage. bas@mednet.ucla.edu. 310.794.9009. Why do you evaluate?. Five reasons of evaluating. FORMATIVE. informs program development. SUMMATIVE. demonstrate program’s success and impact. UNDERSTANDING. summative . assessment. Nathan L. Wall. Anne H. Davidson. CCSSO - National Conference on Student Assessment Annual Meeting. Austin, TX : 2017. Background & Purpose. Test platforms for computer-based assessments must incorporate flexibility in how students can interact with test content.. Identification . of . Concerns. , . Priorities . and . Resources. Kelly Jorgensen. Peggy Miksch. Sarah Walters. Vera Stroup-Rentier. Webinar Instructions. We recommend use of a land line.  This will allow for clearest reception for you and for the presenters when you ask a question. . Christine Murray, UNC Greensboro. Cindy . Fraga Rizo, . UNC Chapel Hill. Tonya VanDeinse, UNC Chapel Hill. Presentation Overview. Data & Evaluation Strategies of the Guilford County Family Justice Center – . Session I: Learning about Logic Models. Hosted by the [insert alliance here]. Moderator:. Presenter:. Date. Time. 1. Introductions. Workshop facilitator:. Participants:. Name and affiliation. 2. Agenda. 0.70, and if PBIAS 25% for streamflow, PBIAS 55% for sediment, and PBIAS 70% for N and P. For PBIAS, constituent-specific performance ratings were determined based on uncertainty of measureddata. How to evaluate the performance of a model?. Methods for Performance Evaluation. How to obtain reliable estimates?. Methods for Model Comparison. How to compare the relative performance . of different models?. (EVAPREM). Indrek Ints. Estonian . Rescue. . Board. Brussels. 18.01.2017. Project . partners. :. Estonian . Rescue. . Board. (CO);. University. of Tartu, Estonia (BE1);. State Fire and Rescue Service of Latvia . A Systematic Review . Érika MERCIER. 1. , . Ségolène. CHAGNON-MONARQUE. 1. , François LAVIGNE. 1. , . Tareck. AYAD. 1. Centre . hospitalier. . universitaire. de Montréal (CHUM), . Université.