Thursday, April 26, 2018

Probabilistic vs Deterministic Messaging

This past Winter, our office (TFX) participated in the NWS' prob snow experiment. For those who might not be familiar with what that is or what it involved, it was a way to experiment with utilizing snowfall probability information within operations and decision-support activities. Perhaps in another post I'll ponder the good and the bad about the experiment, itself. But, for now, I wanted to take it a different direction.

Related to that experiment, a question was posed...is probabilistic or deterministic information better when it comes to messaging? At its core, this question is part of a larger and ongoing debate related to the effective communication of weather hazards. That debate is a fascinating and challenging one, but is probably too long for one post. For now, I'll just address the one piece of the puzzle that focuses on probabilistic vs deterministic messaging.

When it comes to snowfall amounts, what do we often see? Ranges. And, we seem to gravitate toward certain ranges at that. 1-3", 3-6", 6-12". If you are one of those rebel types, you might even use 2-5" or 3-7". Oh the humanity...

The interesting (note I said interesting and not necessarily bad) part about the end-user's use of ranges is the seemingly automatic focus on the high number. Knowing the worst-case scenario isn't a bad thing in of itself, but how it's used can be. Just before a winter storm a couple months ago, a friend of mine texted me and said, 'Hey! I heard we are supposed to get 7" of snow'. The winter product from our office said something to the effect of 2-4" with isolated amounts up to 7", if I remember correctly. My friend read that as we are getting 7" of snow. I doubt he was alone in that assessment.

I often give ranges when messaging upcoming snowfall events and I am not here to argue against that. My end-game is to think through the different possibilities. Recently, I decided to give the ole probability method a try. Prior to a winter event, a caller asked how much snow we expected for her area. With experimentation on the brain, I boldly informed her that there was an 80% chance of exceeding 4" at her house. To which she replied, 'So, do you think we might get a foot?'.

The sample size on my little experiment is incredibly small. But, how much would you be willing to wager against her response representing a large part of the population? One thing that stuck out to me in her response was the 12" amount. After talking with her more, I got the sense that 12" is when she starts having problems in her world. It's the point when her daily plans change. I believe that is why her mind immediately jumped to a foot. For her, my arbitrary percentage-greater-than-x-amount didn't help. Now, had I given her the probability of exceeding 12", well that could have been a different story. Would she have been able to interpret it effectively? I don't know.

When it comes to the general public, the thresholds for when action is taken is all over the place. That lady's threshold was 12". A recent transplant from the South would probably have a different response. So where does that leave us as Meteorologists? In a very challenging position. We have a responsibility to message hazardous weather, but to a group of people who don't even share a common breaking point.

On the flip side, we have individuals or groups (DOT, emergency managers, etc) that often DO have specific thresholds that we can know. I watched an enlightening presentation recently that looked at the potential effectiveness of probability information for decision-makers like the DOT. I get the sense that probability messaging works great for them. Honestly, I believe it could work great for the general public as well. The challenge is our inability to know each and every person's breaking point.

One part of the prob snow experiment that I really liked was that it gave probability information for several breaking points (2", 4", 6", 8", 12", 16"). We may not be able to know all thresholds, but we can certainly try to cover as many as possible in our messaging, within reason. But, that's just snow. What about rain, hail size, tornadoes, tornado strength, etc? Do we say "this storm will produce up to golf ball size hail" or "there is an 80% chance of exceeding quarter size hail?". I'm not sure a warning product is the place to put a lot of probability wording, if nothing else but for the sake of time/understanding. Imagine The Weather Channel scrolling the probability of multiple thresholds, or hearing those probabilities being read over Weather Radio broadcasts/statements?

My answer to the question of probabilistic or deterministic? The verdict is still out, but I imagine it involves some sort of a mix that relates to the known users, the product, and the event. I don't know if there will come a time when all of our messages are completely understood, used correctly, and heeded, but working through and experimenting with this piece of the puzzle is beneficial to the larger discussion regarding effective communication. In the spirit of probabilistic messaging, I will inform you that there is a 100% chance that I will blog more about effective communication down the road...

Monday, April 16, 2018

My VTEC Coding is Changing

Warming temperatures following an active and very snowy winter = flooding. I've put out more Flood Warnings in the past 3 days than I have the past 3 years. RiverPro isn't the most user-friendly product generator, which means a lot of extra QC of the VTEC coding. That got me thinking about the "VTEC coding" of my life and how it is about to be changed.

I recently accepted a position with the NWS office in Wichita, KS, so perhaps this would fall under the continuation (CON) category? It is quite the exciting change for my family and I. Career-wise, my focus in research, projects, etc has often revolved around convection, and what a great opportunity and location for continuing that! But, as exciting as this "CON" is, I would be remiss to not look back at the past 3 years. Just like when continuing a warning...you would be remiss to not look back at what the storm has been doing up to this point.

When I came to Great Falls, I could not believe how fortunate I was to get the opportunity to work for the NWS. I still look back on that time and am so grateful. When I walked through the doors of TFX 3 years ago, I had no idea what was ahead. In a few weeks, I will walk out the doors of Great Falls a changed man.

I know, I know, that sounds so cliche...and I am not a big fan of phrases like that. However, this one could not be more true. See, I came to Great Falls being very particular about many things, both in the field of Meteorology and in my personal life. Wow did I ever get punched in the face in that area! Some things are worth being more picky about, but it's just not healthy to pick every battle. I picked a lot of battles in the beginning and I regret that. But, through some coaching and tough experiences, I came to realize just how picky I was. It blew my mind. I never fully realized I was that way. So much so, I ended up apologizing to my family and close friends, many years after the fact, for how picky I had been. Have I perfected the issue? Nope. But, I am much more aware of it which has helped me to be more intentional about being careful to let some things go. Life is just so much less stressful when you can learn to let certain things go. It's worth the try...

Also, it turns out, I have struggled with communication, fear, and self-confidence issues. Some of those struggles I was more aware of, but didn't necessarily know the best way to address them. Let's just say the past 3 years have been like going back to college. Only this time my major was "Becoming a Better Man, Husband, Dad, and Co-Worker". Some of the courses were pretty intense, but SOOOO worth it. To...um...use another cliche phrase, my life will never be the same after my time here in Great Falls.

Being able to serve people through working with the NWS is a dream come true. Little did I know just how important this dream would be in my life. It has given me the opportunity to read more, to spend more time with my family, to be challenged and to grow as a Meteorologist, to be challenged and grow as a husband/Dad/co-worker, and also to cross paths with people who have had a profound impact on me.

As my family and I head to Kansas, I go there not as a perfected man. Rather, I go there with an improved understanding of my strengths and weaknesses and how to better address the areas where I fall short, while being humbly confident in the areas where I excel. Perhaps there were many different paths to ICT, and hindsight is 20/20, but I wouldn't have had it any other way.