Operational Monitoring of Weather Radar Receiving Chain Using the Sun
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A method for operational monitoring of a weather radar receiving chain, including the antenna gain and the receiver, is presented. The “online” method is entirely based on the analysis of sun signals in the polar volume data produced during operational scanning of weather radars. The method is an extension of that for determining the weather radar antenna pointing at low elevations using sun signals, and it is suited for routine application. The solar flux from the online method agrees very well with that obtained from “offline” sun tracking experiments at two weather radar sites. Furthermore, the retrieved sun flux is compared with data from the Dominion Radio Astrophysical Observatory (DRAO) in Canada. Small biases in the sun flux data from the Dutch and Finnish radars (between −0.93 and +0.47 dB) are found. The low standard deviations of these sun flux data against those from DRAO (0.14–0.20 dB) demonstrate the stability of the weather radar receiving chains and of the sun-based online monitoring. Results from a daily analysis of the sun signals in online radar data can be used for monitoring the alignment of the radar antenna and the stability of the radar receiver system. By comparison with the observations from a sun flux monitoring station, even the calibration of the receiving chain can be checked. The method presented in this paper has great potential for routine monitoring of weather radars in national and international networks.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".