Articles | Volume 18, issue 16
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-18-3897-2025
© Author(s) 2025. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-18-3897-2025
© Author(s) 2025. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Evaluation of the operational MODIS cloud mask product for detecting cirrus clouds
Żaneta Nguyen Huu
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Institute of Geography and Spatial Management, Jagiellonian University, Gronostajowa St 7, 30387 Cracow, Poland
Doctoral School of Exact and Natural Sciences, Jagiellonian University, Prof. St. Łojasiewicza St 11, 30348 Cracow, Poland
Department of Satellite Remote Sensing, Institute of Meteorology and Water Management – NRI, P. Borowego St 14, 30215 Cracow, Poland
Andrzej Z. Kotarba
Space Research Centre, Polish Academy of Sciences, Bartycka 18A, 00716 Warsaw, Poland
Agnieszka Wypych
Institute of Geography and Spatial Management, Jagiellonian University, Gronostajowa St 7, 30387 Cracow, Poland
Related authors
No articles found.
Andrzej Kotarba
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-1500, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-1500, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
Deep convective clouds are difficult to locate precisely in weather satellite images due to viewing-angle distortions. We tested a method that estimates cloud-top heights from infrared temperature data alone — available on weather satellites for over 40 years without need for advanced sensors. The method proved accurate enough to correct these distortions, enabling consistent long-term storm cloud records across all generations of European weather satellites using a single, uniform approach.
Andrzej Z. Kotarba and Izabela Wojciechowska
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 18, 2721–2738, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-18-2721-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-18-2721-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
The research investigates methods for detecting deep convective clouds (DCCs) using satellite infrared data, essential for understanding long-term climate trends. By validating three popular detection methods against lidar–radar data, it found moderate accuracy (below 75 %), emphasizing the importance of fine-tuning thresholds regionally. The study shows how small threshold changes significantly affect the climatology of severe storms.
Andrzej Z. Kotarba
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 15, 4307–4322, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-4307-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-4307-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Space profiling lidars offer a unique insight into cloud properties in Earth’s atmosphere, and are considered the most reliable source of cloud information. However, lidar-based cloud climatologies are infrequently sampled: every 7 to 91 d, and only along the ground track. This study evaluated how accurate are the cloud data from existing (CALIPSO, ICESat-2, Aeolus) and planned (EarthCARE) space lidars, when compared to a cloud climatology obtained with observations taken every day.
Cited articles
Ackerman, S. A., Liou, K.-N., Valero, F. P. J., and Pfister, L.: Heating Rates in Tropical Anvils, J. Atmos. Sci., 45, 1606–1623, 1988. a
Ackerman, S. A., Strabala, K. I., Menzel, W. P., Frey, R. A., Moeller, C. C., and Gumley, L. E.: Discriminating clear sky from clouds with MODIS, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 103, 32141–32157, https://doi.org/10.1029/1998JD200032, 1998. a, b, c
Ackerman, S. A., Holz, R. E., Frey, R., Eloranta, E. W., Maddux, B. C., and McGill, M.: Cloud detection with MODIS. Part II: Validation, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 25, 1073–1086, https://doi.org/10.1175/2007JTECHA1053.1, 2008. a, b
Ackerman, S., et al.: MODIS Atmosphere L2 Cloud Mask Product, NASA MODIS Adaptive Processing System, Goddard Space Flight Center, USA, https://doi.org/10.5067/MODIS/MYD35_L2.061, 2017. a
Amato, U., Antoniadis, A., Cuomo, V., Cutillo, L., Franzese, M., Murino, L., and Serio, C.: Statistical cloud detection from SEVIRI multispectral images, Remote Sens. Environ., 112, 750–766, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2007.06.004, 2008. a
Baum, B. A., Menzel, W. P., Frey, R. A., Tobin, D. C., Holz, R. E., Ackerman, S. A., Heidinger, A. K., and Yang, P.: MODIS cloud-top property refinements for collection 6, J. Appl. Meteorol. Clim., 51, 1145–1163, https://doi.org/10.1175/JAMC-D-11-0203.1, 2012. a, b
Behrangi, A., Nguyen, H., and Granger, S.: Probabilistic seasonal prediction of meteorological drought using the bootstrap and multivariate information, J. Appl. Meteorol. Clim., 54, 1510–1522, https://doi.org/10.1175/JAMC-D-14-0162.1, 2015. a
Boucher, O., Randall, D., Artaxo, P., Bretherton, C., Feingold, G., Forster, P., Kerminen, V.-M., Kondo, Y., Liao, H., Lohmann, U., Rasch, P., Satheesh, S., Sherwood, S., Stevens, B., and Zhang, X.-Y.: 2013: Clouds and Aerosols, in: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 571–658, https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.016, 2013. a
Campbell, J. R., Lolli, S., Lewis, J. R., Gu, Y., and Welton, E. J.: Daytime cirrus cloud top-of-the-atmosphere radiative forcing properties at a midlatitude site and their global consequences, J. Appl. Meteorol. Clim., 55, 1667–1679, https://doi.org/10.1175/JAMC-D-15-0217.1, 2016. a
Chen, P. Y., Srinivasan, R., Fedosejevs, G., and Narasimhan, B.: An automated cloud detection method for daily NOAA-14 AVHRR data for Texas, USA, Int. J. Remote Sens., 23, 2939–2950, https://doi.org/10.1080/01431160110075631, 2002. a
Cohen, J.: A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales, Educ. Psychol. Meas., 20, 37–46, https://doi.org/10.1177/001316446002000104, 1960. a
Efron, B.: The Jackknife, the bootstrap, and other resampling plans, Philadelphia, Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Tech. rep., 1980. a
Feng, X., Delsole, T., and Houser, P.: Bootstrap estimated seasonal potential predictability of global temperature and precipitation, Geophys. Res. Lett., 38, 1–6, https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GL046511, 2011. a
Frey, R. A., Ackerman, S. A., Liu, Y., Strabala, K. I., Zhang, H., Key, J. R., and Wang, X.: Cloud detection with MODIS. Part I: Improvements in the MODIS cloud mask for Collection 5, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 25, 1057–1072, https://doi.org/10.1175/2008JTECHA1052.1, 2008. a, b
Frey, R. A., Ackerman, S. A., Holz, R. E., Dutcher, S., and Griffith, Z.: The continuity MODIS-VIIRS cloud mask, Remote Sens.-Basel, 12, 1–18, https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12203334, 2020. a
Gao, B. C. and Kaufman, Y. J.: Selection of the 1.375-µm MODIS channel for remote sensing of cirrus clouds and stratospheric aerosols from space, J. Atmos. Sci., 52, 4231–4237, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1995)052<4231:sotmcf>2.0.co;2, 1995. a, b
Gu, L., Ren, R., and Zhang, S.: Automatic cloud detection and removal algorithm for MODIS remote sensing imagery, Journal of Software, 6, 1289–1296, https://doi.org/10.4304/jsw.6.7.1289-1296, 2011. a
Guenther, B., Xiong, X., Salomonson, V. V., Barnes, W., and Young, J.: On-orbit performance of the Earth Observing System Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer; first year of data, Remote Sens. Environ., 83, 16–30, 2002. a
Heidinger, A. K. and Pavolonis, M. J.: Gazing at cirrus clouds for 25 years through a split window. Part I: Methodology, J. Appl. Meteorol. Clim., 48, 1100–1116, https://doi.org/10.1175/2008JAMC1882.1, 2009. a
Holz, R. E., Ackerman, S. A., Nagle, F. W., Frey, R., Dutcher, S., Kuehn, R. E., Vaughan, M. A., and Baum, B.: Global Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) cloud detection and height evaluation using CALIOP, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 114, 1–17, https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JD009837, 2009. a
Iida, Y., Kubota, T., Iguchi, T., and Oki, R.: Evaluating sampling error in TRMM/PR rainfall products by the bootstrap method: Estimation of the sampling error and its application to a trend analysis, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 115, 1–14, https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JD014257, 2010. a
Jolliffe, I. T.: Uncertainty and inference for verification measures, Weather Forecast., 22, 637–650, https://doi.org/10.1175/WAF989.1, 2007. a
Kärcher, B.: Formation and radiative forcing of contrail cirrus, Nat. Commun., 9, 1–17, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-04068-0, 2018. a
Kinne, S. and Liou, K.-N.: The Effects of the Nonsphericity and Size Distribution of Ice Crystals on the Radiative Properties of Cirrus Clouds, Atmos. Res., 24, 273–284, 1989. a
Kotarba, A. Z.: Regional high-resolution cloud climatology based on MODIS cloud detection data, Int. J. Climatol., 36, 3105–3115, https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.4539, 2016. a
Kotarba, A. Z.: Calibration of global MODIS cloud amount using CALIOP cloud profiles, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 13, 4995–5012, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-4995-2020, 2020. a
Kotarba, A. Z. and Nguyen Huu, Ż.: Accuracy of Cirrus Detection by Surface-Based Human Observers, J. Climate, 35, 3227–3241, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-21-0430.1, 2022. a, b, c, d
Liu, Y., Key, J. R., Frey, R. A., Ackerman, S. A., and Menzel, W. P.: Nighttime polar cloud detection with MODIS, Remote Sens. Environ., 92, 181–194, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2004.06.004, 2004. a
Liu, Z., Vaughan, M., Winker, D., Kittaka, C., Getzewich, B., Kuehn, R., Omar, A., Powell, K., Trepte, C., and Hostetler, C.: The CALIPSO lidar cloud and aerosol discrimination: Version 2 algorithm and initial assessment of performance, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 26, 1198–1213, https://doi.org/10.1175/2009JTECHA1229.1, 2009. a, b
Lolli, S., Campbell, J. R., Lewis, J. R., Gu, Y., Marquis, J. W., Chew, B. N., Liew, S. C., Salinas, S. V., and Welton, E. J.: Daytime top-of-the-atmosphere cirrus cloud radiative forcing properties at Singapore, J. Appl. Meteorol. Clim., 56, 1249–1257, https://doi.org/10.1175/JAMC-D-16-0262.1, 2017. a
Macke, A., Francis, P. N., Mcfarquhar, G. M., and Kinne, S.: The role of ice particle shapes and size distributions in the single scattering properties of cirrus clouds, J. Atmos. Sci., 55, 2874–2883, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1998)055<2874:TROIPS>2.0.CO;2, 1998. a
McGill, M. J., Vaughan, M. A., Trepte, C. R., Hart, W. D., Hlavka, D. L., Winker, D. M., and Kuehn, R.: Airborne validation of spatial properties measured by the CALIPSO lidar, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 112, 1–8, https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD008768, 2007. a
Minnis, P., Trepte, Q. Z., Sun-Mack, S., Chen, Y., Doelling, D. R., Young, D. F., Spangenberg, D. A., Miller, W. F., Wielicki, B. A., Brown, R. R., Gibson, S. C., and Geier, E. B.: Cloud detection in nonpolar regions for CERES using TRMM VIRS and Terra and Aqua MODIS data, IEEE T. Geosci. Remote, 46, 3857–3884, https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2008.2001351, 2008. a
Mishchenko, M. I., Rossow, W. B., Macke, A., and Lacis, A.: Sensitivity of cirrus cloud albedo, bidirectional reflectance and optical thickness retrieval accuracy to ice particle shape, J. Geophys. Res., 101, 16973–16985, 1996. a
Murino, L., Amato, U., Carfora, M. F., Antoniadis, A., Huang, B., Menzel, W. P., and Serio, C.: Cloud detection of modis multispectral images, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 31, 347–365, https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-13-00088.1, 2014. a
Musial, J. P., Hüsler, F., Sütterlin, M., Neuhaus, C., and Wunderle, S.: Daytime low stratiform cloud detection on AVHRR imagery, Remote Sens.-Basel, 6, 5124–5150, https://doi.org/10.3390/rs6065124, 2014. a
NASA/LARC/SD/ASDC: CALIPSO Lidar Level 25 km Cloud Layer, V4-20, NASA Langley Atmospheric Science Data Center DAAC [data set], https://doi.org/10.5067/CALIOP/CALIPSO/LID_L2_05KMCLAY-STANDARD-V4-20, 2018. a
Noel, V., Chepfer, H., Chiriaco, M., and Yorks, J.: The diurnal cycle of cloud profiles over land and ocean between 51° S and 51° N, seen by the CATS spaceborne lidar from the International Space Station, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 9457–9473, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-9457-2018, 2018. a
Oreopoulos, L., Cho, N., and Lee, D.: New Insights about Cloud Vertical Structure from CloudSat and CALIPSO observations, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 122, 9280–9300, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JD026629, 2017. a, b
Orlowsky, B., Bothe, O., Fraedrich, K., Gerstengarbe, F. W., and Zhu, X.: Future climates from bias-bootstrapped weather analogs: An application to the Yangtze River basin, J. Climate, 23, 3509–3524, https://doi.org/10.1175/2010JCLI3271.1, 2010. a
Rossow, W. B. and Schiffer, R. A.: ISCCP Cloud Data Products, B. Am. Meteor. Soc., 72, 2–20, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0477(1991)072<0002:ICDP>2.0.CO;2, 1991. a
Sassen, K., Wang, Z., and Liu, D.: Global distribution of cirrus clouds from CloudSat/cloud-aerosol lidar and infrared pathfinder satellite observations (CALIPSO) measurements, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 114, 1–12, https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JD009972, 2008. a, b, c
Stanski, H., Wilson, L., and Burrows, W.: Survey of Common Verification Methods in Meteorology, Tech. rep., 1989. a
Stephens, G. L. and Webster, P. J.: Clouds and Climate: Sensitivity of Simple Systems, J. Atmos. Sci., 38, 235–247, 1981. a
Stephens, G. L., Tsay, S. C., Stackhouse, P. W., and Flatau, P. J.: The relevance of the microphysical and radiative properties of cirrus clouds to climate and climatic feedback, J. Atmos. Sci., 47, 1742–1754, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(1990)047<1742:TROTMA>2.0.CO;2, 1990. a, b
Stephens, G. L., Winker, D., Pelon, J., Trepte, C., Vane, D., Yuhas, C., L'Ecuyer, T., and Lebsock, M.: Cloudsat and calipso within the a-train: Ten years of actively observing the earth system, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 99, 569–581, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-16-0324.1, 2018. a
Stubenrauch, C. J., Cros, S., Guignard, A., and Lamquin, N.: A 6 year global cloud climatology from the Atmospheric InfraRed Sounder AIRS and a statistical analysis in synergy with CALIPSO and CloudSat, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 7197–7214, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-7197-2010, 2010. a
Sun-Mack, S., Minnis, P., Chen, Y., Kato, S., Yi, Y., Gibson, S. C., Heck, P. W., and Winker, D. M.: Regional apparent boundary layer lapse rates determined from CALIPSO and MODIS data for cloud-height determination, J. Appl. Meteorol. Clim., 53, 990–1011, https://doi.org/10.1175/JAMC-D-13-081.1, 2014. a
Tang, H., Yu, K., Hagolle, O., Jiang, K., Geng, X., and Zhao, Y.: A cloud detection method based on a time series of MODIS surface reflectance images, Int. J. Digit. Earth, 6, 157–171, https://doi.org/10.1080/17538947.2013.833313, 2013. a
Thorsen, T. J., Fu, Q., Comstock, J. M., Sivaraman, C., Vaughan, M. A., Winker, D. M., and Turner, D. D.: Macrophysical properties of tropical cirrus clouds from the CALIPSO satellite and from ground-based micropulse and Raman lidars, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 118, 9209–9220, https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50691, 2013. a
Vaughan, M. A., Powell, K. A., Kuehn, R. E., Young, S. A., Winker, D. M., Hostetler, C. A., Hunt, W. H., Liu, Z., Mcgill, M. J., and Getzewich, B. J.: Fully automated detection of cloud and aerosol layers in the CALIPSO lidar measurements, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 26, 2034–2050, https://doi.org/10.1175/2009JTECHA1228.1, 2009. a, b
Wang, C., Luo, Z. J., and Huang, X.: Parallax correction in collocating CloudSat and Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) observations: Method and application to convection study, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 116, 1–9, https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JD016097, 2011. a
Wang, T., Fetzer, E. J., Wong, S., Kahn, B. H., and Yue, Q.: Validation of MODIS cloud mask and multilayer flag using CloudSat-CALIPSO cloud profiles and a cross-reference of their cloud classifications, J. Geophys. Res., 121, 11620–11635, https://doi.org/10.1038/175238c0, 2016. a
Wilks, D. S., Neumann, C. J., and Lawrence, M. B.: Statistical extension of the National Hurricane Center 5 d forecasts, Weather Forecast., 24, 1052–1063, https://doi.org/10.1175/2009WAF2222189.1, 2009. a
Winker, D. M., Hostetler, A. C., Vaughan, M. A., and Omar, A. H.: CALIOP Algorithm Theoretical Basis Document Part 1: CALIOP Instrument, and Algorithms Overview, 2006. a
Winker, D., Cai, X., Vaughan, M., Garnier, A., Magill, B., Avery, M., and Getzewich, B.: A Level 3 monthly gridded ice cloud dataset derived from 12 years of CALIOP measurements, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 16, 2831–2855, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-2831-2024, 2024. a
WMO: International Cloud Atlas, Volume I: Manual on the Observation of Clouds and Other Meteors, WMO, https://doi.org/10.2307/1550553, 1977. a
Xie, Y., Qu, J. J., and Xiong, X.: Improving the CALIPSO VFM product with Aqua MODIS measurements, Remote Sens. Lett., 1, 195–203, https://doi.org/10.1080/01431161003720387, 2010. a
Zhang, Y., Laube, M., and Raschke, E.: Numerical simulations of cirrus properties, Contributions to Atmospheric Physics, 67, 109–120, 1994. a
Zhang, Y., MacKe, A., and Albers, F.: Effect of crystal size spectrum and crystal shape on stratiform cirrus radiative forcing, Atmos. Res., 52, 59–75, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-8095(99)00026-5, 1999. a
Zou, L., Griessbach, S., Hoffmann, L., Gong, B., and Wang, L.: Revisiting global satellite observations of stratospheric cirrus clouds, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 9939–9959, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-9939-2020, 2020. a
Short summary
Clouds affect Earth's energy balance, with high-altitude cirrus clouds contributing to atmospheric warming. While active satellite sensors are the most accurate for detecting cirrus clouds, they are not ideal for long-term studies. This study compares Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) and Cloud-Aerosol Lidar with Orthogonal Polarization (CALIOP) data, testing six MODIS methods, one MODIS-based test, and two International Satellite Cloud Climatology Project (ISCCP) tests. The all tests consolidation (ATC) was the most effective, achieving 72.98 % accuracy during daytime and 59.50 % at night, making it relatively accurate for creating a cirrus mask.
Clouds affect Earth's energy balance, with high-altitude cirrus clouds contributing to...