Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 261

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 13 of the 13 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Absolute accuracy of water vapor measurements from six operational radiosonde types launched during AWEX‐G and implications for AIRS validation

Open access
Miloshevich, Larry M., Vömel, Holger, Whiteman, David N., Lesht, Barry M., Schmidlin, F. J., Russo, Felicita·2006·Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres

Abstract

A detailed assessment of radiosonde water vapor measurement accuracy throughout the tropospheric column is needed for assessing the impact of observational error on applications that use the radiosonde data as input, such as forecast modeling, radiative transfer calculations, remote sensor retrieval validation, climate trend studies, and development of climatologies and cloud and radiation parameterizations. Six operational radiosonde types were flown together in various combinations with a reference‐quality hygrometer during the Atmospheric Infrared Sounder (AIRS) Water Vapor Experiment‐Ground (AWEX‐G), while simultaneous measurements were acquired from Raman lidar and microwave radiometers. This study determines the mean accuracy and variability of the radiosonde water vapor measurements relative to simultaneous measurements from the University of Colorado (CU) Cryogenic Frostpoint Hygrometer (CFH), a reference‐quality standard of known absolute accuracy. The accuracy and performance characteristics of the following radiosonde types are evaluated: Vaisala RS80‐H, RS90, and RS92; Sippican Mark IIa; Modem GL98; and the Meteolabor Snow White hygrometer. A validated correction for sensor time lag error is found to improve the accuracy and reduce the variability of upper tropospheric water vapor measurements from the Vaisala radiosondes. The AWEX data set is also used to derive and validate a new empirical correction that improves the mean calibration accuracy of Vaisala measurements by an amount that depends on the temperature, relative humidity, and sensor type. Fully corrected Vaisala radiosonde measurements are found to be suitably accurate for AIRS validation throughout the troposphere, whereas the other radiosonde types are suitably accurate under only a subset of tropospheric conditions. Although this study focuses on the accuracy of nighttime radiosonde measurements, comparison of Vaisala RS90 measurements to water vapor retrievals from a microwave radiometer reveals a 6–8% dry bias in daytime RS90 measurements that is caused by solar heating of the sensor. An AWEX‐like data set of daytime measurements is highly desirable to complete the accuracy assessment, ideally from a tropical location where the full range of tropospheric temperatures can be sampled.

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 · 10.1029/2005jd006083

Cites

13 of 13 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 13 references

Cited by

See all 261

Metadata

Authors
Miloshevich, L. M., Vömel, H., Whiteman, D. N., Lesht, B. M., Schmidlin, F. J., & Russo, F.
Venue
Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres
Published
2006-04-07
Volume
111
Issue
D9
ISSN
0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2059775841
Cited by
261
References
13
FWCI
52.59
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: Absolute accuracy of water vapor measurements from six operational radiosonde types launched during AWEX‐G and implications for AIRS validation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/2005jd006083
The paper
Miloshevich, L. M., Vömel, H., Whiteman, D. N., Lesht, B. M., Schmidlin, F. J., & Russo, F. (2006). Absolute accuracy of water vapor measurements from six operational radiosonde types launched during AWEX‐G and implications for AIRS validation. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres. https://doi.org/10.1029/2005jd006083

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.