Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 323

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 20 of the 20 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Evaluation of satellite-retrieved extreme precipitation rates across the central United States

Open access
AghaKouchak, A., Behrangi, A., Sorooshian, S., Hsu, K., Amitai, E.·2011·Journal of Geophysical Research

Abstract

[1] Water resources management, forecasting, and decision making require reliable estimates of precipitation. Extreme precipitation events are of particular importance because of their severe impact on the economy, the environment, and the society. In recent years, the emergence of various satellite-retrieved precipitation products with high spatial resolutions and global coverage have resulted in new sources of uninterrupted precipitation estimates. However, satellite-based estimates are not well integrated into operational and decision-making applications because of a lack of information regarding the associated uncertainties and reliability of these products. In this study, four satellite-derived precipitation products (CMORPH, PERSIANN, TMPA-RT, and TMPA-V6) are evaluated with respect to their performance in capturing precipitation extremes. The Stage IV (radar-based, gauge-adjusted) precipitation estimates are used as reference data. The results show that with respect to the probability of detecting extremes and the volume of correctly identified precipitation, CMORPH and PERSIANN data sets lead to better estimates. However, their false alarm ratio and volume are higher than those of TMPA-RT and TMPA-V6. Overall, no single precipitation product can be considered ideal for detecting extreme events. In fact, all precipitation products tend to miss a significant volume of rainfall. With respect to verification metrics used in this study, the performance of all satellite products tended to worsen as the choice of extreme precipitation threshold increased. The analyses suggest that extensive efforts are necessary to develop algorithms that can capture extremes more reliably.

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 · 10.1029/2010jd014741

Cites

20 of 20 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 20 references

Cited by

See all 323

Metadata

Authors
AghaKouchak, A., Behrangi, A., Sorooshian, S., Hsu, K., & Amitai, E.
Venue
Journal of Geophysical Research
Published
2011-01-26
Volume
116
Issue
D2
ISSN
0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2082134041
Cited by
323
References
20
FWCI
8.19
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: Evaluation of satellite-retrieved extreme precipitation rates across the central United States. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/2010jd014741
The paper
AghaKouchak, A., Behrangi, A., Sorooshian, S., Hsu, K., & Amitai, E. (2011). Evaluation of satellite-retrieved extreme precipitation rates across the central United States. Journal of Geophysical Research. https://doi.org/10.1029/2010jd014741

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.