The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Combining radar and rain gauge rainfall estimates using conditional merging
Open accessAbstract
The Hydrologist's traditional tool for measuring rainfall is the rain gauge. Rain gauges are relatively cheap, easy to maintain and provide a direct and suitably accurate estimate of rainfall at a point. What rain gauges fail to capture well is the spatial variability of rainfall with time, an important aspect for the credible modelling of a catchment's response to rainfall. This spatial variability is particularly evident at short timescales of up to several days. As the period of accumulation increases, the expected spatial variability is reduced and rain gauges provide improved spatial rainfall estimates. Because of the fractal variability of rainfall in space, simple interpolation between rain gauges does not provide an accurate estimate of the true spatial rainfall field, at short time scales. Weather radar provides (with a single instrument) a highly detailed representation of the spatial structure and temporal evolution of rainfall over a large area. Estimated rainfall rates are derived indirectly from measurements of reflectivity and are therefore subject to a combination of systematic and random errors. This article describes a recently proposed merging technique and presents an application to simulated rainfall fields. The technique employed is Conditional Merging (Ehret, 2002), which makes use of Kriging to extract the optimal information content from the observed data. A mean field based on the Kriged rain gauge data is adopted, while the spatial detail from the radar is retained, reducing bias, but keeping the spatial variability observed by the radar. The variance of the estimate is reduced in the vicinity of the gauges where they are able to provide good information on the true rainfall field. Copyright © 2005 Royal Meteorological Society
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Westra, S., Fowler, H. J., Evans, J. P., Alexander, L. V., Berg, P., Johnson, F., Kendon, E. J., Lenderink, G., & Roberts, N. M. (2014) · Reviews of Geophysics · doi:10.1002/2014rg000464 · Cited by 1,533
A review of advances in flash flood forecasting
Hapuarachchi, H. A. P., Wang, Q. J., & Pagano, T. C. (2011) · Hydrological Processes · doi:10.1002/hyp.8040 · Cited by 560
Metadata
- Authors
- Sinclair, S., & Pegram, G.
- Venue
- Atmospheric Science Letters
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2005-01
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 19-22
- ISSN
- 1530-261X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2010560793
- Cited by
- 260
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 1.49
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Combining radar and rain gauge rainfall estimates using conditional merging. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/asl.85
- The paper
- Sinclair, S., & Pegram, G. (2005). Combining radar and rain gauge rainfall estimates using conditional merging. Atmospheric Science Letters. https://doi.org/10.1002/asl.85
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.