Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 494

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Smoothing, filtering, and boundary effects

Shapiro, Ralph·1970·Reviews of Geophysics

Abstract

Numerical integrations of finite‐difference analogs of systems of nonlinear partial differential equations, such as those arising in atmospheric dynamics, are subject to computational instability from a variety of causes. One type of instability is produced by a spurious, nonlinear growth of high‐frequency components that may be introduced by roundoff, truncation, and observational error. This type of instability, first discussed by N. A. Phillips, can be suppressed by a suitable choice of finite‐difference method or by the use of a filter that selectively damps the high‐frequency components. Though much effort is being devoted to the development of stable finite‐difference procedures, and considerable success has been achieved, all such methods involve high‐frequency smoothing either implicitly or explicitly. It is therefore important that the effects of such filtering be fully understood. Filtering and smoothing operators are developed for use in conjunction with the numerical integration of nonlinear systems and for other purposes. The general procedure is demonstrated for simple one‐dimensional operators and the properties of such operators are thoroughly explored. The development is then expanded to allow for compound operators designed to suit some particular requirement and further extended to more than one dimension. Both real and complex operators are discussed. Reverse smoothers or wave amplifiers are introduced, and some of the problems associated with their use are discussed. A general procedure is outlined for the construction of an ‘ideal’ low‐pass filter; that is, a filter that removes the shortest resolvable wave component (the 2‐grid‐interval wave) but restores all other wave components as close as is desired to their original amplitudes without amplifying or changing the phase of any wave component. Finally, the effects, sometimes disastrous, of finite domains on the properties of the smoothing operators are explored for a variety of common boundary assumptions.

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/rg008i002p00359

Cites

6 of 6 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 6 references

Metadata

Authors
Shapiro, R.
Venue
Reviews of Geophysics
Published
1970-05
Volume
8
Issue
2
Pages
359-387
ISSN
  • 0096-1043 (ISSN-L)
  • 8755-1209
  • 1944-9208
OpenAlex
W2062213220
Cited by
494
References
6
FWCI
2.40
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: Smoothing, filtering, and boundary effects. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/rg008i002p00359
The paper
Shapiro, R. (1970). Smoothing, filtering, and boundary effects. Reviews of Geophysics. https://doi.org/10.1029/rg008i002p00359

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.