pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.06408 · v2 · pith:3WCYUMDZnew · submitted 2026-06-04 · ⚛️ physics.ao-ph

MODIS Thermal Infrared Sounding (MOTIS): Estimating Tropical Cyclone Central Pressure from Warm-Core Anomalies

Jinghuai Yao , Chi Yan Kwok , Puyuan Du , Yubo Wang , Derrick Herndon This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-27 22:34 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.ao-ph
keywords tropical cyclonescentral pressure estimationMODISwarm-core anomalyinfrared soundingmultiple linear regressionbest track data
0
0 comments X

The pith

MODIS infrared soundings estimate tropical cyclone central pressure to 4.3 hPa RMSE using warm-core anomalies.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper develops the MOTIS framework to derive central sea-level pressure of tropical cyclones from warm-core temperature anomalies measured by the MODIS instrument's thermal infrared channels. It preprocesses the data specifically for the sensor and fits a multiple linear regression model on cases with clear eyes and high intensity. The resulting estimates achieve r squared of 0.945 and root mean square error of 4.3 hPa on a mean pressure of 937 hPa, exceeding the performance of prior techniques for the strongest storms. The authors build a collection of more than three thousand such estimates spanning 2002 to 2025 and show how these values can reduce uncertainty in best-track records when direct pressure observations are unavailable. The approach is presented as extensible to future geostationary sounders for operational use.

Core claim

Warm-core anomalies captured by MODIS thermal infrared sounding, after instrument-specific preprocessing, can be mapped to tropical cyclone central pressure Pc via multiple linear regression; on high-intensity storms with clear eyes the model reaches r squared equal to 0.945 and RMSE of 4.3 hPa, outperforming existing methods, and supplies 3288 estimates that can roughly halve best-track Pc uncertainties in the absence of direct observations.

What carries the argument

The MOTIS framework, which combines MODIS preprocessing with multiple linear regression on warm-core temperature anomalies to estimate central pressure.

If this is right

  • MOTIS supplies Pc values for intense TCs where other satellite methods lose accuracy.
  • The 3288 estimates can be used to refine historical best-track central-pressure records.
  • Roughly halving Pc uncertainty in periods without direct observations improves intensity climatologies.
  • The same regression structure can be transferred to next-generation geostationary infrared sounders for real-time estimates.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the regression holds across basins, MOTIS-style processing could fill pressure gaps in global reanalysis datasets used for climate studies.
  • Extending the approach to additional infrared channels or combining it with microwave data might reduce sensitivity to residual cloud contamination.
  • Operational centers could test MOTIS outputs as an independent constraint on intensity forecasts for the strongest storms.

Load-bearing premise

The link between MODIS-measured warm-core temperature anomalies and central pressure remains stable enough for a multiple linear regression to generalize to new cases without large interference from eye structure, viewing angle, or moisture.

What would settle it

Applying the trained regression to an independent set of intense clear-eye tropical cyclones whose central pressures are known from aircraft reconnaissance or other direct measurements and verifying whether the root-mean-square error stays near 4.3 hPa.

read the original abstract

This study presents a novel framework for estimating the central sea-level pressure ($P_\mathrm{c}$) of tropical cyclones (TCs) using infrared radiometers. We leverage the long-overlooked combination of high spatial resolution and sounding capability of the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) to measure warm-core anomalies in TC eyes. We develop the MODIS Thermal Infrared Sounding (MOTIS) framework, which performs instrument-specific preprocessing and estimates $P_\mathrm{c}$ using multiple linear regression. MOTIS yields $r^2 = 0.945$ and RMSE = 4.3 hPa for high-intensity TCs with observed clear eyes (mean $P_\mathrm{c} = 937$ hPa), outperforming all existing methods for intense TCs. We construct a dataset of 3288 (1082 clear-eye) MOTIS estimates from 2002 to 2025 and demonstrate its potential to improve the quality of Best Track $P_\mathrm{c}$, roughly halving uncertainties in the absence of pressure observations. Although MODIS is nearing the end of its mission, the MOTIS framework could be extended to next-generation geostationary sounders to provide accurate real-time $P_\mathrm{c}$ estimation for high-intensity TCs.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper introduces the MODIS Thermal Infrared Sounding (MOTIS) framework, which uses high-resolution infrared sounding from MODIS to measure warm-core temperature anomalies in tropical cyclone eyes. It applies instrument-specific preprocessing followed by multiple linear regression to estimate central sea-level pressure (Pc), reporting r² = 0.945 and RMSE = 4.3 hPa on 1082 clear-eye high-intensity cases (mean Pc = 937 hPa). The work constructs a dataset of 3288 (1082 clear-eye) estimates spanning 2002–2025 and claims this can roughly halve uncertainties in Best Track Pc records where direct observations are absent, while suggesting extension to future geostationary sounders.

Significance. If the regression relationship proves stable and generalizable beyond the training cases, MOTIS would provide a useful new observational constraint on Pc for intense TCs, where direct measurements are sparse. The scale of the constructed dataset and the focus on clear-eye cases represent concrete strengths. However, the absence of reported validation details means the headline performance numbers cannot yet be taken as evidence of outperformance over existing methods.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The reported r² = 0.945 and RMSE = 4.3 hPa are presented without any information on cross-validation procedure, size of any independent test set, error bars on the metrics, or handling of selection effects for the clear-eye subset. Because the metrics derive from multiple linear regression fitted directly to observed Pc values, it is impossible to determine whether they reflect in-sample fit or true generalization.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract (regression description): The model is described only as using 'instrument-specific preprocessing' before multiple linear regression on warm-core anomalies. No indication is given that potential confounders (viewing angle, eye diameter, upper-level moisture) are included as predictors or tested via ablation; without such controls the stability of the mapping to Pc remains unverified.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states the dataset spans 2002 to 2025; confirm that MODIS data availability and quality flags are handled consistently across the full period.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their detailed review and constructive comments on the MOTIS manuscript. We address each major comment below and indicate planned revisions to improve clarity on validation and regression details.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The reported r² = 0.945 and RMSE = 4.3 hPa are presented without any information on cross-validation procedure, size of any independent test set, error bars on the metrics, or handling of selection effects for the clear-eye subset. Because the metrics derive from multiple linear regression fitted directly to observed Pc values, it is impossible to determine whether they reflect in-sample fit or true generalization.

    Authors: The reported metrics reflect the fit of the multiple linear regression on the full set of 1082 clear-eye high-intensity cases. The abstract does not include cross-validation, independent test set size, or error bars because the emphasis was on the strength of the observed relationship in these cases. We agree that this information is needed for proper interpretation and will revise the manuscript (including the abstract) to specify the fitting procedure, note that these are in-sample statistics, add error bars on the metrics where feasible, and discuss selection effects for the clear-eye subset. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract (regression description): The model is described only as using 'instrument-specific preprocessing' before multiple linear regression on warm-core anomalies. No indication is given that potential confounders (viewing angle, eye diameter, upper-level moisture) are included as predictors or tested via ablation; without such controls the stability of the mapping to Pc remains unverified.

    Authors: Instrument-specific preprocessing includes corrections for viewing angle and related effects. The regression uses warm-core anomalies at multiple infrared channels as predictors. We did not include eye diameter or upper-level moisture as additional predictors or perform ablation tests. We will revise the manuscript to explicitly list all predictors, discuss potential confounders, and either add relevant controls/ablation analysis or explain their omission to better verify mapping stability. revision: yes

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

Regression performance metrics reduce to in-sample fit on observed Pc

specific steps
  1. fitted input called prediction [Abstract]
    "MOTIS yields r^2 = 0.945 and RMSE = 4.3 hPa for high-intensity TCs with observed clear eyes (mean P_c = 937 hPa), outperforming all existing methods for intense TCs."

    The reported r² and RMSE are the direct output of the multiple linear regression that was fitted to the same observed Pc values used to train the model. The metrics therefore quantify in-sample goodness-of-fit rather than out-of-sample predictive skill, rendering the performance claim partly circular by construction.

full rationale

The headline claim of r²=0.945 and RMSE=4.3 hPa is obtained by fitting a multiple linear regression directly to the observed central pressures in the clear-eye subset. These statistics therefore measure how well the chosen predictors reproduce the training targets rather than independent generalization. The paper presents them as evidence that MOTIS outperforms existing methods, but without explicit held-out validation or ablation for confounders the numbers are partly forced by construction. The underlying physical premise (warm-core anomaly to pressure) is not itself circular, so the overall score is moderate rather than maximal.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on fitted regression coefficients and the domain assumption that warm-core anomalies are a reliable linear proxy for central pressure in clear-eye cases; no new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (1)
  • multiple linear regression coefficients
    Coefficients relating warm-core anomaly predictors to Pc are fitted to match observed pressures.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Warm-core temperature anomalies measured by MODIS are linearly related to central sea-level pressure in clear-eye tropical cyclones.
    This is the modeling premise that justifies the regression approach.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5774 in / 1379 out tokens · 26190 ms · 2026-06-27T22:34:57.495381+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

105 extracted references · 9 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Monthly Weather Review , volume =

    Shimada, Udai and Sawada, Masahiro and Yamada, Hiroyuki , title =. Monthly Weather Review , volume =

  2. [2]

    Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences , volume =

    Shimada, Udai and Sawada, Masahiro and Yamada, Hiroyuki , title =. Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences , volume =

  3. [3]

    Tsuboki, Kazuhisa , title =

  4. [4]

    , title =

    Mitarai, Satoshi and McWilliams, James C. , title =. Geophysical Research Letters , volume =. 2016 , doi =

    2016

  5. [5]

    Hersbach, Hans and Bell, Bill and Berrisford, Paul and Hirahara, Shoji and Hor. The. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society , volume =

  6. [6]

    Status of the

    Angal, Amit and Xiong, Xiaoxiong and Twedt, Kevin and Chang, Tiejun and Geng, Xu and Aldoretta, Emily and P. Status of the. 2023 , organization =

    2023

  7. [7]

    2024 , month =

    Chang, Tiejun and Shrestha, Ashish and Perez Diaz, Carlos and Lin, Hanzhi and Wu, Aisheng and Li, Yonghong and Chen, Na and Wilson, Truman , title =. 2024 , month =

    2024

  8. [8]

    , title =

    Dvorak, Vernon F. , title =

  9. [9]

    and Berndt, Emily and Jedlovec, Gary J

    Elmer, Nicholas J. and Berndt, Emily and Jedlovec, Gary J. , title =. Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology , volume =

  10. [10]

    , title =

    Frank, William M. , title =. Monthly Weather Review , volume =

  11. [11]

    and Velden, Christopher S

    Olander, Timothy L. and Velden, Christopher S. , title =. Weather and Forecasting , volume =

  12. [12]

    and Herndon, Derrick , title =

    Velden, Christopher S. and Herndon, Derrick , title =. Weather and Forecasting , volume =

  13. [13]

    and Goldberg, Mitchell D

    Kidder, Stanley Q. and Goldberg, Mitchell D. and Zehr, Raymond M. and DeMaria, Mark and Purdom, James F. W. and Velden, Christopher S. and Grody, Norman C. and Kusselson, Sheldon J. , title =. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society , volume =

  14. [14]

    and Velden, Christopher S

    Brueske, Kurt F. and Velden, Christopher S. , title =. Monthly Weather Review , volume =

  15. [15]

    and DeMaria, Mark and Knaff, John A

    Demuth, Julie L. and DeMaria, Mark and Knaff, John A. , title =. Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology , volume =

  16. [16]

    Zhang, Zijin and Dong, Xiaolong and Hon, K. K. and Liu, Liling , title =. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans , volume =

  17. [17]

    , title =

    Jordan, Charles L. , title =

  18. [18]

    , title =

    Meissner, Thomas and Ricciardulli, Lucrezia and Wentz, Frank J. , title =. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society , volume =

  19. [19]

    and Nolan, David S

    Stern, Daniel P. and Nolan, David S. , title =. Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences , volume =

  20. [20]

    and Snyder, Chris , title =

    Torn, Ryan D. and Snyder, Chris , title =. Weather and Forecasting , volume =

  21. [21]

    and Mulekar, Madhuri S

    Kimball, Sytske K. and Mulekar, Madhuri S. , title =. Journal of Climate , volume =. 2004 , doi =

    2004

  22. [23]

    and Zehr, Raymond M

    Knaff, John A. and Zehr, Raymond M. , title =. Weather and Forecasting , volume =

  23. [24]

    and Kruk, Michael C

    Knapp, Kenneth R. and Kruk, Michael C. and Levinson, David H. and Diamond, Howard J. and Neumann, Charles J. , title =. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society , volume =

  24. [25]

    and Hobbs, Peter V

    Wallace, John M. and Hobbs, Peter V. , title =

  25. [26]

    Monthly Weather Review , volume =

    Wang, Xiang and Jiang, Haiyan , title =. Monthly Weather Review , volume =. 2019 , doi =

    2019

  26. [27]

    and Brandt, Richard E

    Warren, Stephen G. and Brandt, Richard E. , title =. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres , volume =

  27. [28]

    , title =

    Durden, Stephen L. , title =. Atmosphere , volume =. 2010 , doi =

    2010

  28. [29]

    and Abbott, Mark R

    Esaias, Wayne E. and Abbott, Mark R. and Barton, Ian and Brown, Otis B. and Campbell, Janet W. and Carder, Kendall L. and Clark, Dennis K. and Evans, Robert H. and Hoge, Frank E. and Gordon, Howard R. and others , title =

  29. [30]

    Borbas, E. E. and Seemann, S. and Li, Z. and Li, J. and Kern, A. and Menzel, W. P. , title =

  30. [31]

    and Wang, Zhipeng and Wu, Aisheng and Xiong, Xiaoxiong , title =

    Keller, Graziela R. and Wang, Zhipeng and Wu, Aisheng and Xiong, Xiaoxiong , title =

  31. [32]

    and Sun, J

    Xiong, Jack and Toller, Gary and Chiang, V. and Sun, J. and Esposito, J. and Barnes, William , title =

  32. [33]

    Geoscientific Model Development , volume =

    Saunders, Roger and Hocking, James and Turner, Emma and Rayer, Peter and Rundle, David and Brunel, Pascal and Vidot, Jerome and Roquet, Pascale and Matricardi, Marco and Geer, Alan and others , title =. Geoscientific Model Development , volume =

  33. [36]

    Monthly Weather Review , volume =

    Tsukada, Taiga and Horinouchi, Takeshi , title =. Monthly Weather Review , volume =

  34. [37]

    Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics , volume =

    Feng, Jing and Huang, Yi , title =. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics , volume =

  35. [38]

    and Molinari, John and Vollaro, David , title =

    Ditchek, Sarah D. and Molinari, John and Vollaro, David , title =. Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences , volume =

  36. [39]

    Monthly Weather Review , volume =

    Oyama, Ryo and Wada, Akiyoshi , title =. Monthly Weather Review , volume =

  37. [40]

    and Harper, Bruce and Wells, Frank and Beven, John L

    Velden, Christopher S. and Harper, Bruce and Wells, Frank and Beven, John L. and Zehr, Raymond M. and Olander, Timothy L. and Mayfield, Max and Guard, Charles and Lander, Mark and Edson, Roger and others , title =. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society , volume =

  38. [41]

    2023 , doi =

    Complete. 2023 , doi =

    2023

  39. [42]

    and Franklin, James L

    Landsea, Christopher W. and Franklin, James L. , title =. Monthly Weather Review , volume =

  40. [43]

    and Kossin, James P

    Knaff, John A. and Kossin, James P. and DeMaria, Mark , title =. Weather and Forecasting , volume =

  41. [44]

    and Holliday, Charles R

    Atkinson, Gary D. and Holliday, Charles R. , title =. Monthly Weather Review , volume =

  42. [45]

    , title =

    Courtney, Joe and Knaff, John A. , title =. Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Journal , volume =

  43. [46]

    and Wimmers, Anthony and Velden, Christopher S

    Griffin, Sarah M. and Wimmers, Anthony and Velden, Christopher S. , title =. Weather and Forecasting , volume =

  44. [47]

    Tropical Cyclone Research and Review , volume =

    Velden, Christopher and Burton, Andrew and Kuroiwa, Koji , title =. Tropical Cyclone Research and Review , volume =

  45. [48]

    , title =

    Knapp, Kenneth R. , title =. Journal of Applied Remote Sensing , volume =

  46. [49]

    and Nolan, David S

    Klotz, Bradley W. and Nolan, David S. , title =. Monthly Weather Review , volume =

  47. [50]

    , title =

    Cangialosi, John P. , title =. 2024 , url =

    2024

  48. [51]

    2026 , url =

    Bucci, Lisa and Gibbs, Alex and Jelsema, Jon , title =. 2026 , url =

    2026

  49. [52]

    and Ackerman, Steven A

    Strabala, Kathleen I. and Ackerman, Steven A. and Menzel, W. Paul , title =. Journal of Applied Meteorology , volume =. 1994 , doi =

    1994

  50. [53]

    and Velden, Christopher S

    Herndon, Derrick C. and Velden, Christopher S. and Brueske, Kurt and Wacker, Robert and Kabat, Brian , title =. American Meteorological Society Conference Preprints , note =

  51. [54]

    Xiong, K

    Angal, A., X. Xiong, K. Twedt, T. Chang, X. Geng, E. Aldoretta, and C. P \'e rez D \' az, 2023: Status of the Terra and Aqua MODIS Collection 7 L1B . IGARSS 2023--2023 IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium , IEEE , 4466--4469

    2023

  52. [55]

    D., and C

    Atkinson, G. D., and C. R. Holliday, 1977: Tropical cyclone minimum sea level pressure/maximum sustained wind relationship for the western North Pacific . Monthly Weather Review, 105 (4), 421--427

    1977

  53. [56]

    Borbas, E. E., S. Seemann, Z. Li, J. Li, A. Kern, and W. P. Menzel, 2016: MODIS Atmosphere Profiles Product ( 07\_L2 ). NASA MODIS Adaptive Processing System, Goddard Space Flight Center

    2016

  54. [57]

    F., and C

    Brueske, K. F., and C. S. Velden, 2003: Satellite-based tropical cyclone intensity estimation using the NOAA-KLM series Advanced Microwave Sounding Unit ( AMSU ). Monthly Weather Review, 131 (4), 687--697

    2003

  55. [58]

    Gibbs, and J

    Bucci, L., A. Gibbs, and J. Jelsema, 2026: Tropical Cyclone Report : Hurricane Dora ( EP052023 ), 31 July--17 August 2023 . Tech. rep., National Hurricane Center and Central Pacific Hurricane Center. ://www.nhc.noaa.gov/data/tcr/EP052023_Dora.pdf, 20 January 2026; original report released 5 March 2024

    2026

  56. [59]

    P., 2024: Tropical Cyclone Report : Hurricane Jova ( EP112023 ), 4--10 September 2023

    Cangialosi, J. P., 2024: Tropical Cyclone Report : Hurricane Jova ( EP112023 ), 4--10 September 2023 . Tech. rep., National Hurricane Center. ://www.nhc.noaa.gov/data/tcr/EP112023_Jova.pdf

    2024

  57. [60]

    Shrestha, C

    Chang, T., A. Shrestha, C. Perez Diaz, H. Lin, A. Wu, Y. Li, N. Chen, and T. Wilson, 2024: Proposed calibration improvements for the MODIS thermal emissive bands in Collection 7 Level 1B processing. MCST Internal Memo 1163.2, MODIS Characterization Support Team ( MCST ), NASA Goddard Space Flight Center. ://mcst.gsfc.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/file_atta...

    2024

  58. [61]

    Copernicus Climate Data Store ( CDS ), accessed 2026-02-15, doi:10.24381/cds.143582cf

    Copernicus Climate Change Service (C3S) , 2023: Complete ERA5 global atmospheric reanalysis. Copernicus Climate Data Store ( CDS ), accessed 2026-02-15, doi:10.24381/cds.143582cf

    work page doi:10.24381/cds.143582cf 2023

  59. [62]

    , Bell, B

    Copernicus Climate Data Store , 2018 a : ERA5 hourly data on pressure levels from 1940 to present. Copernicus Climate Data Store, accessed 2026-02-15, doi:10.24381/cds.bd0915c6

    work page doi:10.24381/cds.bd0915c6 2018

  60. [63]

    Copernicus Climate Data Store, accessed 2026-02-15, doi:10.24381/cds.adbb2d47

    Copernicus Climate Data Store , 2018 b : ERA5 hourly data on single levels from 1940 to present. Copernicus Climate Data Store, accessed 2026-02-15, doi:10.24381/cds.adbb2d47

    work page doi:10.24381/cds.adbb2d47 2018

  61. [64]

    Courtney, J., and J. A. Knaff, 2009: Adapting the Knaff and Zehr wind-pressure relationship for operational use in tropical cyclone warning centres. Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Journal, 58 (3), 167--179

    2009

  62. [65]

    Demuth, J. L., M. DeMaria, and J. A. Knaff, 2006: Improvement of Advanced Microwave Sounding Unit tropical cyclone intensity and size estimation algorithms. Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology, 45 (11), 1573--1581

    2006

  63. [66]

    Ditchek, S. D., J. Molinari, and D. Vollaro, 2017: Tropical cyclone outflow-layer structure and balanced response to eddy forcings. Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences, 74 (1), 133--149

    2017

  64. [67]

    L., 2010: Remote sensing and modeling of Cyclone Monica near peak intensity

    Durden, S. L., 2010: Remote sensing and modeling of Cyclone Monica near peak intensity. Atmosphere, 1 (1), 15--33, doi:10.3390/atmos1010015

    work page doi:10.3390/atmos1010015 2010

  65. [68]

    F., 1984: Tropical cyclone intensity analysis using satellite data

    Dvorak, V. F., 1984: Tropical cyclone intensity analysis using satellite data. NOAA technical report NESDIS 11, NOAA/NESDIS

    1984

  66. [69]

    Elmer, N. J., E. Berndt, and G. J. Jedlovec, 2016: Limb correction of MODIS and VIIRS infrared channels for the improved interpretation of RGB composites. Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology, 33 (5), 1073--1087

    2016

  67. [70]

    E., and Coauthors, 1998: An overview of MODIS capabilities for ocean science observations

    Esaias, W. E., and Coauthors, 1998: An overview of MODIS capabilities for ocean science observations. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing , 36 (4), 1250--1265

    1998

  68. [71]

    Huang, 2021: Impacts of tropical cyclones on the thermodynamic conditions in the tropical tropopause layer observed by A-Train satellites

    Feng, J., and Y. Huang, 2021: Impacts of tropical cyclones on the thermodynamic conditions in the tropical tropopause layer observed by A-Train satellites. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 21 (20), 15\,493--15\,518

    2021

  69. [72]

    M., 1977: The structure and energetics of the tropical cyclone I

    Frank, W. M., 1977: The structure and energetics of the tropical cyclone I. Storm structure . Monthly Weather Review, 105 (9), 1119--1135

    1977

  70. [73]

    Gahtan, J., K. R. Knapp, C. J. Schreck, H. J. Diamond, J. P. Kossin, and M. C. Kruk, 2024: International Best Track Archive for Climate Stewardship ( IBTrACS ) project, version 4r01. NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information, ://www.ncei.noaa.gov/products/international-best-track-archive, accessed 2025-11-30, doi:10.25921/82ty-9e16

    work page doi:10.25921/82ty-9e16 2024

  71. [74]

    Griffin, S. M., A. Wimmers, and C. S. Velden, 2024: Predicting short-term intensity change in tropical cyclones using a convolutional neural network. Weather and Forecasting, 39 (1), 177--202

    2024

  72. [75]

    Herndon, D. C., C. S. Velden, K. Brueske, R. Wacker, and B. Kabat, 2004: Upgrades to the UW-CIMSS AMSU -based tropical cyclone intensity estimation algorithm. American Meteorological Society Conference Preprints, ://ams.confex.com/ams/pdfpapers/75933.pdf, paper 4D.1

    2004

  73. [76]

    Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, 146 (730), 1999--2049

    Hersbach, H., and Coauthors, 2020: The ERA5 global reanalysis. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, 146 (730), 1999--2049

    2020

  74. [77]

    L., 1957: Estimating central pressure of tropical cyclones from aircraft data

    Jordan, C. L., 1957: Estimating central pressure of tropical cyclones from aircraft data. Tech. Rep. 10, US Weather Bureau

    1957

  75. [78]

    Keller, G. R., Z. Wang, A. Wu, and X. Xiong, 2017: Aqua MODIS band 24 crosstalk striping. IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters , 14 (4), 475--479

    2017

  76. [79]

    Kidder, S. Q., M. D. Goldberg, R. M. Zehr, M. DeMaria, J. F. W. Purdom, C. S. Velden, N. C. Grody, and S. J. Kusselson, 2000: Satellite analysis of tropical cyclones using the Advanced Microwave Sounding Unit ( AMSU ). Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 81 (6), 1241--1260

    2000

  77. [80]

    K., and M

    Kimball, S. K., and M. S. Mulekar, 2004: A 15-year climatology of North Atlantic tropical cyclones. Part I : Size parameters. Journal of Climate, 17 (18), 3555--3575, doi:10.1175/1520-0442(2004)017<3555:AYCONA>2.0.CO;2, ://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/clim/17/18/1520-0442_2004_017_3555_aycona_2.0.co_2.xml

    work page doi:10.1175/1520-0442(2004)017 2004

  78. [81]

    W., and D

    Klotz, B. W., and D. S. Nolan, 2019: SFMR surface wind undersampling over the tropical cyclone life cycle. Monthly Weather Review, 147 (1), 247--268

    2019

  79. [82]

    Knaff, J. A., J. P. Kossin, and M. DeMaria, 2003: Annular hurricanes. Weather and Forecasting, 18 (2), 204--223

    2003

  80. [83]

    A., and R

    Knaff, J. A., and R. M. Zehr, 2007: Reexamination of tropical cyclone wind--pressure relationships. Weather and Forecasting, 22 (1), 71--88

    2007

Showing first 80 references.