Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 268

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 41 of the 41 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Uncertainties in daily rainfall over Africa: assessment of gridded observation products and evaluation of a regional climate model simulation

Sylla, M. B., Giorgi, F., Coppola, E., Mariotti, L.·2013·International Journal of Climatology

Abstract

We intercompare three gridded observed daily rainfall datasets over Africa (FEWS (Famine Early Warning System), GPCP (Global Precipitation Climatology Project) and TRMM (Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission)) in order to assess uncertainties in observation products towards the evaluation of the performance of a Regional Climate Model (RegCM3) in simulating daily precipitation characteristics over a domain encompassing the whole African continent. We find that different observation products exhibit substantial systematic differences in mean rainfall, but especially in higher order daily precipitation statistics, such as frequency of wet days, precipitation intensity and extremes as well as maximum length of wet and dry spells. For example, FEWS shows mostly higher frequency and lower intensity events than TRMM and GPCP. Thus, the different datasets provide quite different representations of daily precipitation behavior. As a result, although RegCM3 captures pretty well the monsoon rainband evolution and exhibits a representation of daily precipitation statistics within the range of the observations, it performs differently with respect to the various products. For instance, it simulates more intense but less frequent events over East and Southern Africa than in FEWS and vice versa compared to TRMM. We thus highlight the uncertainty in observations as a key factor preventing a rigorous and unambiguous evaluation of climate models over Africa. Improving the quality and consistency of observation products is thus paramount for a better understanding of the response of African climate to global warming. Copyright © 2012 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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/joc.3551

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cites

Show all 41 references

Cited by

See all 268

Metadata

Authors
Sylla, M. B., Giorgi, F., Coppola, E., & Mariotti, L.
Venue
International Journal of Climatology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-07-13
Volume
33
Issue
7
Pages
1805-1817
ISSN
  • 0899-8418 (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0088
OpenAlex
W1563227775
Cited by
268
References
41
FWCI
11.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Uncertainties in daily rainfall over Africa: assessment of gridded observation products and evaluation of a regional climate model simulation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/joc.3551
The paper
Sylla, M. B., Giorgi, F., Coppola, E., & Mariotti, L. (2013). Uncertainties in daily rainfall over Africa: assessment of gridded observation products and evaluation of a regional climate model simulation. International Journal of Climatology. https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.3551

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.