The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Discriminating clear sky from clouds with MODIS
Open accessAbstract
The MODIS cloud mask uses several cloud detection tests to indicate a level of confidence that the MODIS is observing clear skies. It will be produced globally at single‐pixel resolution; the algorithm uses as many as 14 of the MODIS 36 spectral bands to maximize reliable cloud detection and to mitigate past difficulties experienced by sensors with coarser spatial resolution or fewer spectral bands. The MODIS cloud mask is ancillary input to MODIS land, ocean, and atmosphere science algorithms to suggest processing options. The MODIS cloud mask algorithm will operate in near real time in a limited computer processing and storage facility with simple easy‐to‐follow algorithm paths. The MODIS cloud mask algorithm identifies several conceptual domains according to surface type and solar illumination, including land, water, snow/ice, desert, and coast for both day and night. Once a pixel has been assigned to a particular domain (defining an algorithm path), a series of threshold tests attempts to detect the presence of clouds in the instrument field of view. Each cloud detection test returns a confidence level that the pixel is clear ranging in value from 1 (high) to zero (low). There are several types of tests, where detection of different cloud conditions relies on different tests. Tests capable of detecting similar cloud conditions are grouped together. While these groups are arranged so that independence between them is maximized, few, if any, spectral tests are completely independent. The minimum confidence from all tests within a group is taken to be representative of that group. These confidences indicate absence of particular cloud types. The product of all the group confidences is used to determine the confidence of finding clear‐sky conditions. This paper outlines the MODIS cloud masking algorithm. While no present sensor has all of the spectral bands necessary for testing the complete MODIS cloud mask, initial validation of some of the individual cloud tests is presented using existing remote sensing data sets.
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
Accuracy assessment of the MODIS snow products
Hall, D. K., & Riggs, G. A. (2007) · Hydrological Processes · doi:10.1002/hyp.6715 · Cited by 836
Wilson, A. M., & Jetz, W. (2016) · PLOS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1002415 · Cited by 406
MODIS Cloud screening for remote sensing of aerosols over oceans using spatial variability
Martins, J. V., Tanré, D., Remer, L., Kaufman, Y., Mattoo, S., & Levy, R. (2002) · Geophysical Research Letters · doi:10.1029/2001gl013252 · Cited by 351
Pincus, R., Platnick, S., Ackerman, S. A., Hemler, R. S., & Patrick Hofmann, R. J. (2012) · Journal of Climate · doi:10.1175/jcli-d-11-00267.1 · Cited by 342
Self-citationCreamean, J. M., Maahn, M., de Boer, G., McComiskey, A., Sedlacek, A. J., & Feng, Y. (2018) · Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics · doi:10.5194/acp-18-555-2018 · Cited by 45
Metadata
- Authors
- Ackerman, S. A., Strabala, K. I., Menzel, W. P., Frey, R. A., Moeller, C. C., & Gumley, L. E.
- Venue
- Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres
- Publisher
- American Geophysical Union (AGU)
- Published
- 1998-12
- Volume
- 103
- Issue
- D24
- Pages
- 32141-32157
- ISSN
- 0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2013689051
- Cited by
- 1,222
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 11.18
- 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: Discriminating clear sky from clouds with MODIS. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/1998jd200032
- The paper
- Ackerman, S. A., Strabala, K. I., Menzel, W. P., Frey, R. A., Moeller, C. C., & Gumley, L. E. (1998). Discriminating clear sky from clouds with MODIS. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres. https://doi.org/10.1029/1998jd200032
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.