The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
An Automated Technique to Quality Control Radar Reflectivity Data
Open accessAbstract
Echoes in radar reflectivity data do not always correspond to precipitating particles. Echoes on radar may result from biological targets such as insects, birds, or wind-borne particles; from anomalous propagation or ground clutter; or from test and interference patterns that inadvertently seep into the final products. Although weather forecasters can usually identify and account for the presence of such contamination, automated weather-radar algorithms are drastically affected. Several horizontal and vertical features have been proposed to discriminate between precipitation echoes and echoes that do not correspond to precipitation. None of these features by themselves can discriminate between precipitating and nonprecipitating areas. In this paper, a neural network is used to combine the individual features, some of which have already been proposed in the literature and some of which are introduced in this paper, into a single discriminator that can distinguish between “good” and “bad” echoes (i.e., precipitation and nonprecipitation, respectively). The method of computing the horizontal features leads to statistical anomalies in their distributions near the edges of echoes. Also described is how to avoid presenting such range gates to the neural network. The gate-by-gate discrimination provided by the neural network is followed by more holistic postprocessing based on spatial contiguity constraints and object identification to yield quality-controlled radar reflectivity scans that have most of the bad echo removed while leaving most of the good echo untouched. A possible multisensor extension, utilizing satellite data and surface observations, to the radar-only technique is also demonstrated. It is demonstrated that the resulting technique is highly skilled and that its skill exceeds that of the currently operational algorithm.
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
Neural Networks for Pattern Recognition
Bishop, C. M. (1995) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198538493.001.0001 · Cited by 12,287
Cited by
Pysteps: an open-source Python library for probabilistic precipitation nowcasting (v1.0)
Pulkkinen, S., Nerini, D., Pérez Hortal, A. A., Velasco-Forero, C., Seed, A., Germann, U., & Foresti, L. (2019) · Geoscientific Model Development · doi:10.5194/gmd-12-4185-2019 · Cited by 304
The Warning Decision Support System–Integrated Information
Lakshmanan, V., Smith, T., Stumpf, G., & Hondl, K. (2007) · Weather and Forecasting · doi:10.1175/waf1009.1 · Cited by 288
Self-citationDeep-learning-based precipitation observation quality control
Sha, Y., Gagne, D. J., West, G., & Stull, R. (2021) · Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology · doi:10.1175/jtech-d-20-0081.1 · Cited by 13
Metadata
- Authors
- Lakshmanan, V., Fritz, A., Smith, T., Hondl, K., & Stumpf, G.
- Venue
- Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology
- Publisher
- American Meteorological Society
- Published
- 2007-03-01
- Volume
- 46
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 288-305
- ISSN
- 1558-8424 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-8432
- OpenAlex
- W2174658266
- Cited by
- 166
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 6.44
- 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: An Automated Technique to Quality Control Radar Reflectivity Data. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1175/jam2460.1
- The paper
- Lakshmanan, V., Fritz, A., Smith, T., Hondl, K., & Stumpf, G. (2007). An Automated Technique to Quality Control Radar Reflectivity Data. Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology. https://doi.org/10.1175/jam2460.1
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.