Cited by 1,858Precipitation Measurement and AnalysisClimate variability and modelsHydrology and Drought Analysis

A homogeneity test applied to precipitation data.

Alexandersson, Hans·1986·Journal of Climatology

Abstract

In climate research it is important to have access to reliable data which are free from artificial trends or changes. One way of checking the reliability of a climate series is to compare it with surrounding stations. This is the idea behind all tests of the relative homogeneity. Here we will present a simple homogeneity test and apply it to a precipitation data set from south‐western Sweden. More precisely we will apply it to ratios between station values and some reference values. The reference value is a form of a mean value from surrounding stations. It is found valuable to include short and incomplete series in the reference value. The test can be used as an instrument for quality control as far as the mean level of, for instance, precipitation is concerned. In practice it should be used along with the available station history. Several non‐homogeneities are present in these series and probably reflect a serious source of uncertainty in studies of climatic trends and climatic change all over the world. The significant breaks varied from 5 to 25 per cent for this data set. An example illustrates the importance of using relevant climatic normals that refer to the present measurement conditions in constructing maps of anomalies.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/joc.3370060607

Cites

18 of 18 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The standard normal homogeneity test (SNHT) has superior accuracy in identifying the position of a step change under a wide variety of step and trend inhomogeneity scenarios relative to other commonly used methods.

    “While no one test clearly outperforms others under all circumstances, the standard normal homogeneity test (SNHT; Alexandersson 1986) has been shown to have superior accuracy in identifying the position of a step change under a wide variety of step and trend inho-mogeneity scenarios relative to other commonly used methods (DeGaetano 2006; R07).”

    From Homogenization of Temperature Series via Pairwise Comparisons (2009) · cites this paper as Alexandersson 1986

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Alexandersson, H.
Affiliations
Uppsala University (SE)
Corresponding author
Alexandersson, Hans
Venue
Journal of Climatology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1986-01
Volume
6
Issue
6
Pages
661-675
ISSN
0196-1748 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2008720804
Cited by
1,858
References
18
Citations by year
2026: 117 · 2025: 119 · 2024: 105 · 2023: 143 · 2022: 139 · 2021: 101 · 2020: 112 · 2019: 83 · 2018: 102 · 2017: 85 · 2016: 71 · 2015: 62 · 2014: 69 · 2013: 76 · 2012: 67
FWCI
0.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Climatology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Precipitation Measurement and Analysis
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Climate variability and models
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Hydrology and Drought Analysis
Keywords
homogeneity testing, precipitation data, station homogeneity, reference values, quality control, climate anomalies, inhomogeneity, climate trends

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