The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A model function for the ocean‐normalized radar cross section at 14 GHz derived from NSCAT observations
Abstract
A model for the ocean surface normalized radar cross section σ o is derived from 3 months of NASA scatterometer (NSCAT) observations (September 15 to December 18, 1996). The model expresses σ o as a function of wind speed, relative wind direction, incidence angle, and polarization. The dependence of σ o on wind speed is based on collocated special sensor microwave/imager (SSM/I) satellite wind retrievals and European Centre for Medium‐Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) model winds. We find that at low winds (<5 ms−1), the SSM/I winds are more reliable than ECWMF, probably owing to small location errors in the ECMWF wind features. The primary wind direction dependence of σ o (i.e., the second harmonic) is found from histograms of the σ o difference between the forward and aft antennas. The σ o versus wind speed relationship is adjusted for cross‐swath incidence angle differences and is then incorporated into the NSCAT 1 model used to process the 10‐month (September 15, 1996, to June 29, 1997) NSCAT data set. The resulting NSCAT 1 wind vectors are compared to ECMWF wind fields and buoys. The mean and standard deviation of the NSCAT minus ECMWF (buoy) wind speed difference are 0.05 and 1.78 ms−1 (−0.29 and 1.26 ms−1), respectively. The wind direction mean and standard deviation differences are 0.8° and 18.5° (7.9° and 15.7°), respectively. The difference between the NSCAT and the ECMWF (buoy) direction exceeds 90° only 1.1% (1.2%) of the time. We have no explanation for why the buoy wind directions are biased 8° relative to both NSCAT and ECMWF.
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
Cites
A well‐calibrated ocean algorithm for special sensor microwave / imager
Wentz, F. J. (1997) · Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans · doi:10.1029/96jc01751 · Cited by 837
Self-citation
Cited by
Sea 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
Meissner, T., & Wentz, F. J. (2012) · IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing · doi:10.1109/tgrs.2011.2179662 · Cited by 362
Self-citationEffects of Rain Rate and Wind Magnitude on SeaWinds Scatterometer Wind Speed Errors
Weissman, D. E., Bourassa, M. A., & Tongue, J. S. (2002) · Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology · doi:10.1175/1520-0426(2002)019<0738:eorraw>2.0.co;2 · Cited by 130
A Surface Wind Model–Based Method to Estimate Rain-Induced Radar Path Attenuation over Ocean
Li, L., Im, E., Durden, S. L., & Haddad, Z. S. (2002) · Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology · doi:10.1175/1520-0426(2002)019<0658:aswmbm>2.0.co;2 · Cited by 28
Metadata
- Authors
- Wentz, F. J., & Smith, D. K.
- Venue
- Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans
- Publisher
- American Geophysical Union (AGU)
- Published
- 1999-05-15
- Volume
- 104
- Issue
- C5
- Pages
- 11499-11514
- ISSN
- 0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2010851006
- Cited by
- 304
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 15.45
- 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: A model function for the ocean‐normalized radar cross section at 14 GHz derived from NSCAT observations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/98jc02148
- The paper
- Wentz, F. J., & Smith, D. K. (1999). A model function for the ocean‐normalized radar cross section at 14 GHz derived from NSCAT observations. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans. https://doi.org/10.1029/98jc02148
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.