Separating Cloud and Drizzle Signals in Radar Doppler Spectra Using a Parametric Time Domain Method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The ability to separate cloud and drizzle returns in active remote sensing observations is important for understanding the microphysics of clouds and precipitation. Yet, robust separations remain challenging in radar remote sensing. Prior methods for cloud and drizzle separation for radar observations use the properties of the Doppler spectra such as skewness. However, these methods have challenges when the drizzle becomes dominant in the observation volume. This paper presents a parametric time domain method (PTDM) that separates cloud and drizzle using the Doppler spectra measurements without assuming any prior properties of cloud and drizzle. The advantage of PTDM is that it can estimate the signal properties in the time domain and can obtain the cloud and drizzle estimates simultaneously. Based on our radar signal simulations, the uncertainty in estimated power and velocity from PTDM are within 2 dB and 0.02 m s −1 , respectively. We have also evaluated the PTDM algorithm using observations from the Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) Program W-band cloud radar in the Clouds, Aerosols, and Precipitation in the Marine Boundary Layer (CAP-MBL) campaign at the Azores in 2009–10. Two cases corresponding to light and moderate drizzling conditions are considered for the study. The statistics of the estimates obtained show that the PTDM method performs well in separating the cloud and drizzle returns. Finally, the estimated cloud and drizzle reflectivity from PTDM were used to retrieve their corresponding microphysical properties, showing that the retrieved liquid water path agrees to 25 g m −2 with the benchmark microwave method.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".