Cited by 146Meteorological Phenomena and SimulationsAtmospheric aerosols and cloudsOceanographic and Atmospheric Processes

Probabilistic physically based cloud screening of satellite infrared imagery for operational sea surface temperature retrieval

Open access
Merchant, C. J., Harris, A. R., Maturi, E., Maccallum, S.·2005·Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society

Abstract

We propose and demonstrate a fully probabilistic (Bayesian) approach to the detection of cloudy pixels in thermal infrared (TIR) imagery observed from satellite over oceans. Using this approach, we show how to exploit the prior information and the fast forward modelling capability that are typically available in the operational context to obtain improved cloud detection. The probability of clear sky for each pixel is estimated by applying Bayes' theorem, and we describe how to apply Bayes' theorem to this problem in general terms. Joint probability density functions (PDFs) of the observations in the TIR channels are needed; the PDFs for clear conditions are calculable from forward modelling and those for cloudy conditions have been obtained empirically. Using analysis fields from numerical weather prediction as prior information, we apply the approach to imagery representative of imagers on polar‐orbiting platforms. In comparison with the established cloud‐screening scheme, the new technique decreases both the rate of failure to detect cloud contamination and the false‐alarm rate by one quarter. The rate of occurrence of cloud‐screening‐related errors of >1 K in area‐averaged SSTs is reduced by 83%. Copyright © 2005 Royal Meteorological Society.

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 · 10.1256/qj.05.15

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. Di Vittorio, A. V. and Emery, W. J. 2002 An automated, dynamic threshold cloud-masking algorithm for daytime AVHRR images over land. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sensing, 40, 1682-1694 ECMWF 2000- 2005 'ERA-40 project report series'. ECMWF, Reading, UK, available at http:// www.ecmwf.int/publications/library/do/references/list/192
  2. Marsham, J. 2003 'Lake temperatures-thermal remote sensing and assimilation into a lake model'. PhD thesis, University of Edinburgh, UK
  3. Murtagh, F., Barreto, D. and Marcello, J. 2003 Decision boundaries using Bayes factors: the case of cloud masks. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sensing, 41, 2952-2958
  4. Saunders, R.W. 1986 An automated scheme for the removal of cloud contamination from AVHRR radiances over Western Europe. Int. J. Remote Sensing, 7, 867-886
  5. Saunders, R. W. and Kriebel, K. T. 1988 An improved method for detecting clear-sky and cloudy radiances from AHRR data. Int. J. Remote Sensing, 9, 123-150
  6. Saunders, R., Matricardi, M. and Brunel, P. 1999 An improved fast radiative transfer model for assimilation of satellite radiance observations. Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc., 125, 1407-1425
  7. Simpson, J. J., McIntire, T. J. and Sienko, M. 2000 An improved hybrid clustering algorithm for natural scenes. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sensing, 38, 1016-1032
  8. Simpson, J. J., Tsou, Y. L., Schmidt, A. and Harris, A. 2005 Analysis of Along-Track Scanning Radiometer-2 (ATSR-2) data for clouds, glint and sea surface temperature using neural networks. Remote Sensing Environ., in press

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Merchant, C. J., Harris, A. R., Maturi, E., & Maccallum, S.
Affiliations
  • University of Edinburgh (GB)
  • National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (US)
Venue
Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2005-10
Volume
131
Issue
611
Pages
2735-2755
ISSN
  • 0035-9009 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-870X
OpenAlex
W2112608611
Cited by
146
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 8
FWCI
2.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society (publishedVersion)
  • CentAUR (University of Reading) (acceptedVersion)
  • Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Meteorological Phenomena and Simulations
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Atmospheric aerosols and clouds
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Oceanography › Oceanographic and Atmospheric Processes
Keywords
cloud screening, sea surface temperature retrieval, thermal infrared imagery, Bayesian detection, cloud detection, joint probability density function, polar-orbiting satellites, false alarm rate, cloud contamination

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