Comparison of the Minimum Bounding Rectangle and Minimum Circumscribed Ellipse of Rain Cells from TRMM

IF 6.5 2区 地球科学 Q1 METEOROLOGY & ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES
Hongke Cai, Yaqin Mao, Xuanhao Zhu, Yunfei Fu, Renjun Zhou
{"title":"Comparison of the Minimum Bounding Rectangle and Minimum Circumscribed Ellipse of Rain Cells from TRMM","authors":"Hongke Cai, Yaqin Mao, Xuanhao Zhu, Yunfei Fu, Renjun Zhou","doi":"10.1007/s00376-023-2281-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Based on the TRMM dataset, this paper compares the applicability of the improved MCE (minimum circumscribed ellipse), MBR (minimum bounding rectangle), and DIA (direct indexing area) methods for rain cell fitting. These three methods can reflect the geometric characteristics of clouds and apply geometric parameters to estimate the real dimensions of rain cells. The MCE method shows a major advantage in identifying the circumference of rain cells. The circumference of rain cells identified by MCE in most samples is smaller than that identified by DIA and MBR, and more similar to the observed rain cells. The area of rain cells identified by MBR is relatively robust. For rain cells composed of many pixels (N &gt; 20), the overall performance is better than that of MCE, but the contribution of MBR to the best identification results, which have the shortest circumference and the smallest area, is less than that of MCE. The DIA method is best suited to small rain cells with a circumference of less than 100 km and an area of less than 120 km<sup>2</sup>, but the overall performance is mediocre. The MCE method tends to achieve the highest success at any angle, whereas there are fewer “best identification” results from DIA or MBR and more of the worst ones in the along-track direction and cross-track direction. Through this comprehensive comparison, we conclude that MCE can obtain the best fitting results with the shortest circumference and the smallest area on behalf of the high filling effect for all sizes of rain cells.</p>","PeriodicalId":7249,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Atmospheric Sciences","volume":"208 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Atmospheric Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00376-023-2281-9","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"METEOROLOGY & ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Based on the TRMM dataset, this paper compares the applicability of the improved MCE (minimum circumscribed ellipse), MBR (minimum bounding rectangle), and DIA (direct indexing area) methods for rain cell fitting. These three methods can reflect the geometric characteristics of clouds and apply geometric parameters to estimate the real dimensions of rain cells. The MCE method shows a major advantage in identifying the circumference of rain cells. The circumference of rain cells identified by MCE in most samples is smaller than that identified by DIA and MBR, and more similar to the observed rain cells. The area of rain cells identified by MBR is relatively robust. For rain cells composed of many pixels (N > 20), the overall performance is better than that of MCE, but the contribution of MBR to the best identification results, which have the shortest circumference and the smallest area, is less than that of MCE. The DIA method is best suited to small rain cells with a circumference of less than 100 km and an area of less than 120 km2, but the overall performance is mediocre. The MCE method tends to achieve the highest success at any angle, whereas there are fewer “best identification” results from DIA or MBR and more of the worst ones in the along-track direction and cross-track direction. Through this comprehensive comparison, we conclude that MCE can obtain the best fitting results with the shortest circumference and the smallest area on behalf of the high filling effect for all sizes of rain cells.

TRMM 雨区最小边界矩形与最小圆刻椭圆的比较
本文基于 TRMM 数据集,比较了改进的 MCE(最小圆周椭圆)、MBR(最小边界矩形)和 DIA(直接索引区域)方法在雨胞拟合中的适用性。这三种方法都能反映云的几何特征,并应用几何参数估计雨胞的实际尺寸。MCE 方法在识别雨胞周长方面具有很大优势。在大多数样本中,MCE 方法识别出的雨胞周长都小于 DIA 和 MBR 方法识别出的雨胞周长,与观测到的雨胞更为相似。MBR 识别的雨胞面积相对稳健。对于由多个像素(N >20)组成的雨胞,MBR 的总体性能优于 MCE,但对于周长最短、面积最小的最佳识别结果,MBR 的贡献小于 MCE。DIA 方法最适用于周长小于 100 千米、面积小于 120 平方千米的小雨小区,但总体性能一般。MCE 方法往往在任何角度都能取得最高的成功率,而 DIA 或 MBR 的 "最佳识别 "结果较少,沿轨道方向和跨轨道方向的最差结果较多。通过以上综合比较,我们得出结论:MCE 方法在所有大小的雨水小区中都能以最短的周长和最小的面积获得最佳拟合结果,代表了高填充效应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Advances in Atmospheric Sciences
Advances in Atmospheric Sciences 地学-气象与大气科学
CiteScore
9.30
自引率
5.20%
发文量
154
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: Advances in Atmospheric Sciences, launched in 1984, aims to rapidly publish original scientific papers on the dynamics, physics and chemistry of the atmosphere and ocean. It covers the latest achievements and developments in the atmospheric sciences, including marine meteorology and meteorology-associated geophysics, as well as the theoretical and practical aspects of these disciplines. Papers on weather systems, numerical weather prediction, climate dynamics and variability, satellite meteorology, remote sensing, air chemistry and the boundary layer, clouds and weather modification, can be found in the journal. Papers describing the application of new mathematics or new instruments are also collected here.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信