The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The accuracy of the NSCAT 1 vector winds: Comparisons with National Data Buoy Center buoys
Abstract
The overall accuracies of vector wind measurements from the NASA scatterometer (NSCAT) are quantified by comparisons with collocated data from operational U.S. National Data Buoy Center ocean buoys. A vector correlation statistic is used to examine the geographical distribution of full‐mission NSCAT‐buoy differences. The dependences of the vector correlation on collocation radius and scatterometer errors such as wind speed offset and random component errors are quantified. For purposes of NSCAT validation, 30 ocean moored buoys having high full‐mission sample correlations are considered. When applied to this set of ocean buoys, a nonlinear analysis shows that the 25‐km resolution NSCAT wind speeds have unity gain, an offset of −0.3 m s−1, an rms error of 1.3 m s−1, and component standard deviations of ∼1.3 m s−1. For wind speeds greater than 6 m s−1, fewer than 3% of all collocated solutions have significant ambiguity removal errors. The rms directional difference for the remaining vectors is less than 17°. At lower wind speeds the frequency of ambiguity removal errors increases and the directional accuracy of the “correct” vectors decreases with decreasing wind speed, consistent with the assumptions of the random error model underlying the nonlinear wind speed regression approach. While the primary emphasis of this paper is on determining the quantitative accuracy of the NSCAT wind velocity measurements, the analysis techniques and interpretations have more general application to validation studies involving vector quantities.
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
Satellite Measurements Reveal Persistent Small-Scale Features in Ocean Winds
Chelton, D. B., Schlax, M. G., Freilich, M. H., & Milliff, R. F. (2004) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1091901 · Cited by 891
Self-citationSea Salt Aerosol Production: Mechanisms, Methods, Measurements and Models—A Critical Review
Lewis, R., & Schwartz, E. (2004) · Geophysical Monograph Series · doi:10.1029/gm152 · Cited by 658
An improved C‐band scatterometer ocean geophysical model function: CMOD5
Hersbach, H., Stoffelen, A., & de Haan, S. (2007) · Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans · doi:10.1029/2006jc003743 · Cited by 584
Chelton, D. B., Esbensen, S. K., Schlax, M. G., Thum, N., Freilich, M. H., Wentz, F. J., Gentemann, C. L., McPhaden, M. J., & Schopf, P. S. (2001) · Journal of Climate · doi:10.1175/1520-0442(2001)014<1479:oocbsw>2.0.co;2 · Cited by 533
Self-citationRueda-Roa, D. T., & Muller-Karger, F. E. (2013) · Deep-Sea Research Part I: Oceanographic Research Papers · doi:10.1016/j.dsr.2013.04.008 · Cited by 159
Metadata
- Authors
- Freilich, M. H., & Dunbar, R. S.
- Venue
- Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans
- Publisher
- American Geophysical Union (AGU)
- Published
- 1999-05-15
- Volume
- 104
- Issue
- C5
- Pages
- 11231-11246
- ISSN
- 0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1986015925
- Cited by
- 234
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 16.36
- 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: The accuracy of the NSCAT 1 vector winds: Comparisons with National Data Buoy Center buoys. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/1998jc900091
- The paper
- Freilich, M. H., & Dunbar, R. S. (1999). The accuracy of the NSCAT 1 vector winds: Comparisons with National Data Buoy Center buoys. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans. https://doi.org/10.1029/1998jc900091
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.