It might also be argued that there is not a tremendous diversity in the AQA analyses. Only if all of these are considered and presented is there significant diversity. Most work has looked at climatological behavior, not necessarily the problematic behavior of ozone. SAI has produced a couple of reports for the Southeast Modeling Center on the representativeness of the OTAG ozone episodes. I suggest that the workgroup take a look at these reports and incorporate them, as appropriate, into the web site and report.
Measurements have bias, as well.
Both the uncertainty and bias of data can increase when coupled with analytical tools. Clearly, data sets provide only partial coverage in space and time, and the analyses themselves, as often as not, utilize only small subsets of data. In general, I think AQA needs to consult with the modeling group on the particular weaknesses of the UAM-V model, otherwise we may only be stating the obvious generalities. It is important to note that we are looking for lines of convergence and divergence from independent analyses, not merely 'directional corroboration'. We want to learn from not only from work that supports previous analyses but from work that provides new and possibly contradictory insights.