Table 3.
Correlations between the heat index values calculated by each of the 21 algorithms.
| Algorithm no.a | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0.99 | 0.99 | 0.95 | –0.76 | –0.76 | 0.99 | 0.99 | 0.95 | 0.73 |
| 2 | — | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0.99 | 0.96 | –0.77 | –0.77 | 1 | 0.99 | 0.96 | 0.73 |
| 3 | — | — | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0.99 | 0.96 | –0.77 | –0.77 | 1 | 0.99 | 0.96 | 0.73 |
| 4 | — | — | — | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0.99 | 0.99 | 0.96 | –0.78 | –0.78 | 1 | 0.99 | 0.96 | 0.72 |
| 5 | — | — | — | — | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0.99 | 0.99 | 0.96 | –0.77 | –0.77 | 1 | 0.99 | 0.94 | 0.70 |
| 6 | — | — | — | — | — | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0.99 | 0.99 | 0.96 | –0.77 | –0.77 | 1 | 0.99 | 0.94 | 0.70 |
| 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0.99 | 0.99 | 0.96 | –0.77 | –0.77 | 1 | 0.99 | 0.94 | 0.70 |
| 8 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0.99 | 0.99 | 0.96 | –0.78 | –0.78 | 1 | 0.99 | 0.95 | 0.70 |
| 9 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0.99 | 0.99 | 0.96 | –0.77 | –0.77 | 1 | 0.99 | 0.95 | 0.72 |
| 10 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0.99 | 0.99 | 0.96 | –0.77 | –0.77 | 1 | 0.99 | 0.94 | 0.70 |
| 11 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1 | 1 | 0.99 | 0.99 | 0.96 | –0.79 | –0.79 | 1 | 0.99 | 0.94 | 0.69 |
| 12 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1 | 0.99 | 0.99 | 0.95 | –0.76 | –0.76 | 0.99 | 0.99 | 0.95 | 0.73 |
| 13 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1 | 1 | 0.94 | –0.72 | –0.72 | 0.99 | 1 | 0.95 | 0.79 |
| 14 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1 | 0.94 | –0.71 | –0.71 | 0.99 | 1 | 0.95 | 0.79 |
| 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1 | –0.79 | –0.79 | 0.96 | 0.94 | 0.90 | 0.62 |
| 16 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1 | 1 | –0.80 | –0.71 | –0.78 | –0.23 |
| 17 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1 | –0.80 | –0.71 | –0.78 | –0.23 |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1 | 0.99 | 0.94 | 0.68 |
| 19 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1 | 0.95 | 0.79 |
| 20 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1 | 0.74 |
| 21 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1 |
| For each pair of algorithms, both algorithms were used to generate heat index values for daily weather from the 50 U.S. state capitals in 2011. The Pearson correlation between daily values from the two algorithms was then calculated and is presented here (values were correlated in time per station and then averaged over all stations). aColumns and rows are marked by algorithm number, corresponding to algorithm numbers in Tables 1 and 2. | |||||||||||||||||||||