REVIEW 1 cited by
A Statistical Analysis of Noisy Crowdsourced Weather Data
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
A Statistical Analysis of Noisy Crowdsourced Weather Data
read the original abstract
Spatial prediction of weather-elements like temperature, precipitation, and barometric pressure are generally based on satellite imagery or data collected at ground-stations. None of these data provide information at a more granular or "hyper-local" resolution. On the other hand, crowdsourced weather data, which are captured by sensors installed on mobile devices and gathered by weather-related mobile apps like WeatherSignal and AccuWeather, can serve as potential data sources for analyzing environmental processes at a hyper-local resolution. However, due to the low quality of the sensors and the non-laboratory environment, the quality of the observations in crowdsourced data is compromised. This paper describes methods to improve hyper-local spatial prediction using this varying-quality noisy crowdsourced information. We introduce a reliability metric, namely Veracity Score (VS), to assess the quality of the crowdsourced observations using a coarser, but high-quality, reference data. A VS-based methodology to analyze noisy spatial data is proposed and evaluated through extensive simulations. The merits of the proposed approach are illustrated through case studies analyzing crowdsourced daily average ambient temperature readings for one day in the contiguous United States.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
On Statistical Properties of A Veracity Scoring Method for Spatial Data
Introduces veracity-score-based estimators for spatial regression parameters that are consistent under non-stationary noise and asymptotically more efficient than OLS.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.