pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.10830 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-12 · 📡 eess.SP

Rain Rate Estimation Bounds and Weather-Adaptive Pilot Allocation for LEO Satellite ISAC

Haofan Dong , Houtianfu Wang , Hanlin Cai , O. Tansel Baydas , Ozgur B. Akan This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 15:15 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 📡 eess.SP
keywords rain rate estimationLEO satellite ISACBayesian Cramér-Rao boundpilot allocationKu-band attenuationtemporal correlationmulti-link fusionweather-adaptive sensing
0
0 comments X

The pith

Bayesian bounds let LEO satellite links sense rain rates down to 0.95 mm per hour while preserving data throughput.

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

The paper shows that attenuation in Ku-band LEO OFDM downlinks carries usable information about rain rate along the slant path, and derives the Bayesian Cramér-Rao bound that turns this information into a quantitative lower limit on estimation error. Incorporating a log-normal prior from large-scale rain data, temporal correlation across a half-hour window, and fusion over hundreds of links tightens the detectable rain rate from 4.3 mm/h down to 0.95 mm/h or lower. The authors then build a weather-adaptive pilot allocation rule that switches resources between sensing and communication according to the current bound, and identify that the lowest valid elevation angle of 15 degrees gives the strongest sensing geometry. If these bounds hold in practice, future LEO constellations could deliver continuous precipitation maps as a byproduct of normal broadband service without extra spectrum or hardware.

Core claim

The central claim is that the Bayesian Cramér-Rao bound for rain-rate estimation from LEO broadband OFDM downlinks, derived in closed form from the corrected ITU-R attenuation model and a log-normal prior fitted to 186292 samples, reduces the minimum detectable rain rate to 1.1 mm/h in a single snapshot; further tightening occurs with temporal correlation of 0.95 over 30 minutes and multi-link fusion across 215 links, while a weather-adaptive pilot allocator that minimizes the bound subject to a spectral-efficiency constraint exhibits three distinct regimes and pairs with a CUSUM detector for sub-10-minute rain-onset alerts. A closed-form geometric analysis additionally shows that the 15° P.

What carries the argument

The Bayesian Cramér-Rao bound (BCRB) on rain-rate estimation error, which incorporates prior Fisher information from log-normal rain statistics and is minimized by a weather-adaptive pilot allocation scheme with three operating regimes.

If this is right

  • A single snapshot already lowers the minimum detectable rain rate from 4.3 mm/h to 1.1 mm/h.
  • Temporal fusion over a 30-minute window with correlation 0.95 further reduces the bound to 0.95 mm/h.
  • Fusion across 215 links produces an RMSE lower bound of approximately 0.07 mm/h at 20 mm/h rain rate.
  • The sensing-optimal elevation lies at the 15° validity floor and yields a 1.58 times geometric improvement over the 38° reference.
  • The weather-adaptive allocator plus CUSUM detector achieves rain-onset detection with sub-10-minute delay for rates of 20 mm/h and above.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Global LEO constellations could supply high-resolution, real-time precipitation maps as a side effect of ordinary broadband traffic.
  • The anti-correlation between sensing-optimal and communication-optimal elevations implies that each orbital pass naturally contains alternating windows best suited to one objective or the other.
  • Extending the multi-link fusion analysis to fully dynamic LEO geometries would require updating the bound at each time step to reflect changing slant paths.

Load-bearing premise

Rain rate is distributed log-normally with coefficient of variation 1.05 and maintains temporal correlation 0.95 across 30-minute intervals.

What would settle it

Comparison of the predicted BCRB RMSE values against actual estimation errors obtained from LEO satellite downlinks at varying elevations, link counts, and rain rates.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.10830 by Hanlin Cai, Haofan Dong, Houtianfu Wang, O. Tansel Baydas, Ozgur B. Akan.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: System overview. (a) A LEO satellite transmits Ku-band OFDM; rain attenuates the signal per P.838. (b) Pipeline: [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: CRB fundamentals. (a) CRB RMSE vs rain rate for three frequency configurations. (b) Side-information hierarchy. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Bayesian CRB. (a) RMSE lower bound versus rain rate: standard CRB (black solid) and BCRB at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (a) Pareto frontier at R = 20 mm/h. (b) BCRB/CRB ratio vs ρ. where β ∗ = (x ∗ − 1)−1 and x ∗ = 1 + q 1 + Np σ 2 sys/c0 with c0 ≜ (10/ ln 10)2 ≈ 18.86. Proof: See Appendix G. For the parameters of Section II-C, Lemma 2 yields θ ∗ el ≈ 9.7 ◦ . This closed-form optimum lies outside the validity range of the ITU-R P.618 reduction factor in (5), which becomes unreliable below θel ≈ 10◦ and is conservative only … view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Dynamic slant geometry. (a) Rmin vs elevation: the realistic model (solid blue) develops a U-shape from competing Leff and SNR trends, while the constant-σn reference (dashed red) decreases monotonically. The closed-form optimum from Lemma 2 lies in the P.618 extrapolation zone; the operational cap at θel = 15◦ is shown. (b) Joint (R, θel) plane: the sensing￾optimal locus (blue) drifts from 15◦ at R = 3 mm… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: CUSUM detection. (a) Detection delay vs R; theory (45) (lines) and MC (markers). (b) Pd within 5/10/30 min. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Rain rate R (mm/h) 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 Optimal pilot fraction * (R) * rate (a) SEmin=0.5 SEmin=1.0 SEmin=2.0 SEmin=3.0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Rain rate R (mm/h) 10 0 B C R B R MSE (m m/h, T=30) (b) Fixed =0.05 Fixed =0.10 Fixed =0.20 Adaptive * (R) Standard CRB ( =0.10)… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Adaptive allocation. (a) η ∗ (R) for four Cmin. (b) BCRB comparison: adaptive η ∗ achieves the lowest BCRB among all schemes that satisfy the Cmin constraint; fixed baselines ignore this constraint. is positive definite, ensuring local convergence; in practice I ≤ 5 iterations suffice for relative tolerance 10−6 with no convergence failures across 10,000 Monte Carlo trials. Remark 5 (MLE efficiency): The M… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: 215-link radar validation. (a) Predicted vs measured attenuation. (b) Binned attenuation vs [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: (a) Per-satellite scatter. (b) BCRB RMSE vs [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Gauge validation. (a) SML vs gauge. (b) r vs distance; decorrelation at ∼5 km. that the model captures the statistical tail behavior. The radar￾SML correlation (r = 0.72) is consistent with CML validation benchmarks in [38]. E. Per-Satellite and Multi-Link Analysis [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Representative per-event time series. (a) Convective event: predicted attenuation tracks the rapid onset and peak. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_11.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Rain attenuates Ku-band satellite signals by up to 20~dB, encoding precipitation information along the Earth-space slant path. This paper derives the Bayesian Cram\'{e}r-Rao bound (BCRB) for rain rate estimation from LEO broadband OFDM downlinks. Using corrected ITU-R P.838-3 coefficients, the standard CRB yields a minimum detectable rain rate $R_{\min} \approx 4.3\mmh$ for a single link at the $38^\circ$ reference elevation. We derive the prior Fisher information in closed form for log-normal rain ($c_v = 1.05$, from 186{,}292 samples) and show that a single-snapshot BCRB reduces $R_{\min}$ to $1.1\mmh$; exploiting temporal correlation ($\rho = 0.95$) over a 30-min window further tightens it to $0.95\mmh$, while multi-link fusion across $N = 215$ links lowers the operating-point RMSE \emph{lower bound} at $R = 20\mmh$ to approximately $0.07\mmh$. Building on these bounds, we formulate a weather-adaptive pilot allocation that minimizes the BCRB subject to a hard spectral-efficiency constraint, characterize its three-regime structure (full-sensing, throughput-tracking, outage), and pair it with a CUSUM rain onset detector achieving sub-10-min delay for $R \geq 20\mmh$. A closed-form analysis of dynamic LEO slant geometry identifies a sensing-optimal elevation at the P.618-validity floor of $15^\circ$ that yields a $1.58\times$ geometric improvement over the $38^\circ$ baseline, exposing a structural anti-correlation between sensing- and communication-optimal elevations along an orbital pass. Validation against 9.4~million radar samples from 215 Ku-band GEO satellite links ($r = 0.72$, RMSE~$= 1.24\dB$) and 113 rain gauges confirms the underlying attenuation model; the bounds transfer to LEO constellations under matched OFDM signal parameters, with dedicated LEO validation left for future work.

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 / 2 minor

Summary. The paper derives the Bayesian Cramér-Rao bound (BCRB) for rain-rate estimation from Ku-band LEO satellite OFDM downlinks, starting from the standard CRB of approximately 4.3 mm/h at 38° elevation. It obtains a closed-form prior Fisher information for a log-normal rain-rate distribution (cv = 1.05 from 186292 samples), yielding a single-snapshot BCRB of 1.1 mm/h; temporal correlation (ρ = 0.95) over 30 min further tightens this to 0.95 mm/h, while fusion across N = 215 links produces an RMSE lower bound of ~0.07 mm/h at R = 20 mm/h. The work formulates a weather-adaptive pilot allocation minimizing the BCRB subject to a spectral-efficiency constraint (three regimes: full-sensing, throughput-tracking, outage), pairs it with a CUSUM onset detector, and identifies a sensing-optimal elevation of 15° (1.58× geometric gain over 38°). The underlying attenuation model is validated against 9.4 million radar samples (r = 0.72, RMSE = 1.24 dB) and 113 gauges; LEO transfer is asserted under matched OFDM parameters.

Significance. If the derivations hold, the paper supplies useful closed-form BCRB expressions and a practical pilot-allocation policy for LEO ISAC rain sensing. Credit is due for the analytic prior Fisher information, the geometric slant-path analysis exposing the sensing–communication elevation trade-off, the CUSUM detector latency result, and the large-scale empirical validation of the ITU-R P.838-3 model. These elements could guide dual-use waveform design in future LEO constellations.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section III-B] The closed-form prior Fisher information (Section III-B) is derived under a log-normal model with fixed cv = 1.05 and ρ = 0.95; the reported numerical BCRB reductions (R_min = 1.1 mm/h single-snapshot, 0.95 mm/h temporal) are therefore directly dependent on these fitted values. A sensitivity analysis or propagation of uncertainty from the 186292-sample fit would strengthen the load-bearing quantitative claims.
  2. [Section IV-C] The multi-link BCRB with N = 215 (Section IV-C) draws the link count from the GEO validation dataset; the paper asserts transfer to LEO under matched OFDM parameters, yet LEO orbital dynamics produce continuously changing elevation and path length within a single pass. Explicit verification that the N-link fusion gain remains representative under these time-varying geometries is needed to support the 0.07 mm/h operating-point bound.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Section IV] The three-regime structure of the weather-adaptive pilot allocation (full-sensing, throughput-tracking, outage) is described analytically but would benefit from a compact table summarizing the decision thresholds and resulting BCRB/SE trade-offs.
  2. [Figure 7] Figure captions for the elevation-sensitivity plots should explicitly state the fixed parameters (e.g., transmit power, bandwidth, cv, ρ) used to generate the 1.58× gain curve.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments and positive evaluation of the work. We address each major comment below, indicating the revisions we will make to strengthen the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Section III-B] The closed-form prior Fisher information (Section III-B) is derived under a log-normal model with fixed cv = 1.05 and ρ = 0.95; the reported numerical BCRB reductions (R_min = 1.1 mm/h single-snapshot, 0.95 mm/h temporal) are therefore directly dependent on these fitted values. A sensitivity analysis or propagation of uncertainty from the 186292-sample fit would strengthen the load-bearing quantitative claims.

    Authors: We agree that the reported BCRB values are tied to the specific fitted parameters cv = 1.05 and ρ = 0.95 derived from the 186,292-sample dataset. Although the large sample size supports the robustness of these estimates, we concur that a sensitivity analysis would better substantiate the quantitative claims. In the revised version, we will add a sensitivity study that varies cv and ρ within bootstrap-derived confidence intervals from the fit and shows that the BCRB reductions remain substantial across the plausible range. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Section IV-C] The multi-link BCRB with N = 215 (Section IV-C) draws the link count from the GEO validation dataset; the paper asserts transfer to LEO under matched OFDM parameters, yet LEO orbital dynamics produce continuously changing elevation and path length within a single pass. Explicit verification that the N-link fusion gain remains representative under these time-varying geometries is needed to support the 0.07 mm/h operating-point bound.

    Authors: The value N = 215 is taken from the GEO validation dataset to illustrate the scaling potential of multi-link fusion. The per-link BCRB expressions are geometry-dependent and can be evaluated at any instantaneous elevation; the paper asserts transfer to LEO under matched OFDM parameters precisely because the underlying attenuation and signal models remain valid. We acknowledge, however, that a complete treatment of time-varying LEO geometries would require orbit-integrated fusion analysis. We will revise the text to clarify this point, provide a brief evaluation of fusion gain under representative averaged LEO elevations, and reiterate that full dynamic LEO validation is reserved for future work. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in derivation chain

full rationale

The paper derives the BCRB via standard Bayesian information formulas, with a closed-form prior Fisher information for log-normal rain using cv=1.05 estimated from an external 186292-sample dataset and an assumed ρ=0.95. These are parameter inputs to the general bound expressions rather than outputs that reduce to the inputs by construction. Multi-link fusion applies the derived bound at N=215 drawn from the validation set, but the bound formula itself is independent. No self-citations, uniqueness theorems, or ansatzes from prior author work are invoked to force the central results. The attenuation model is validated externally against 9.4M radar samples (r=0.72, RMSE=1.24 dB), and the paper explicitly flags dedicated LEO validation as future work. The derivation chain is mathematically self-contained.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 3 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on the log-normal rain rate prior with fitted cv, the assumed temporal correlation, and the ITU-R attenuation model; no new physical entities are postulated. The multi-link count and elevation angles are setup parameters drawn from validation.

free parameters (3)
  • cv = 1.05
    Coefficient of variation for log-normal rain rate distribution
  • rho = 0.95
    Temporal correlation coefficient for rain rate over 30-min window
  • N = 215
    Number of links used for multi-link fusion bound
axioms (3)
  • domain assumption Rain rate follows a log-normal distribution
    Used to derive closed-form prior Fisher information
  • domain assumption Signal attenuation follows corrected ITU-R P.838-3 model
    Relates rain rate to observed attenuation for Fisher information calculation
  • domain assumption OFDM downlink parameters are matched between GEO validation and LEO
    Allows transfer of bounds to LEO constellations

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5730 in / 2013 out tokens · 119150 ms · 2026-05-10T15:15:40.562241+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

38 extracted references · 38 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Recommendation ITU-R P.838-3: Specific attenuation model for rain for use in prediction methods,

    ITU-R, “Recommendation ITU-R P.838-3: Specific attenuation model for rain for use in prediction methods,” 2005, international Telecommu- nication Union, Geneva, Switzerland

    work page 2005

  2. [2]

    Country-wide rainfall maps from cellular communication networks,

    A. Overeem, H. Leijnse, and R. Uijlenhoet, “Country-wide rainfall maps from cellular communication networks,”Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA, vol. 110, no. 8, pp. 2741–2745, Feb. 2013

    work page 2013

  3. [3]

    Environmental monitoring by wireless communication networks,

    H. Messer, A. Zinevich, and P. Alpert, “Environmental monitoring by wireless communication networks,”Science, vol. 312, no. 5774, p. 713, May 2006

    work page 2006

  4. [4]

    Commercial microwave link networks for rainfall observation: Assessment of the current status and future challenges,

    C. Chwala and H. Kunstmann, “Commercial microwave link networks for rainfall observation: Assessment of the current status and future challenges,”WIREs Water, vol. 6, no. 2, p. e1337, 2019

    work page 2019

  5. [5]

    Data formats and standards for opportunistic rainfall sensors,

    M. Fencl, R. Nebuloni, J. C. Andersson, V . Bares, N. Blettner, G. Caz- zaniga, C. Chwala, M. Colli, L. de V os, A. El Hachem,et al., “Data formats and standards for opportunistic rainfall sensors,”Open Research Europe, vol. 3, p. 169, 2024

    work page 2024

  6. [6]

    On the potential of using emerging microwave links for city rainfall monitoring,

    C. Han, G. Zhang, B. Ji, J. Huo, and H. Messer, “On the potential of using emerging microwave links for city rainfall monitoring,”IEEE Communications Magazine, vol. 61, no. 11, pp. 174–180, 2023

    work page 2023

  7. [7]

    Rainfall measurement from the opportunistic use of an Earth–space link in the Ku band,

    L. Barth `es and C. Mallet, “Rainfall measurement from the opportunistic use of an Earth–space link in the Ku band,”Atmos. Meas. Tech., vol. 6, no. 8, pp. 2181–2193, 2013

    work page 2013

  8. [8]

    Enhanced quantitative precipitation estimation through the opportunis- tic use of Ku TV-SAT links via a dual-channel procedure,

    L. Gelbart, L. Barth `es, F. Mercier-Tigrine, A. Chazottes, and C. Mallet, “Enhanced quantitative precipitation estimation through the opportunis- tic use of Ku TV-SAT links via a dual-channel procedure,”Atmos. Meas. Tech., vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 351–370, 2025

    work page 2025

  9. [9]

    Opportunistic rain rate estimation from measurements of satellite downlink attenuation: A survey,

    F. Giannetti and R. Reggiannini, “Opportunistic rain rate estimation from measurements of satellite downlink attenuation: A survey,”Sensors, vol. 21, no. 17, p. 5872, Aug. 2021

    work page 2021

  10. [10]

    The OpenSat4Weather dataset: Ku-band satellite link data for precipitation monitoring,

    R. Nebuloni, M. Graf, G. Cazzaniga, F. Mercier, and M. Turko, “The OpenSat4Weather dataset: Ku-band satellite link data for precipitation monitoring,”Earth Syst. Sci. Data Discuss., pp. 1–23, 2025, preprint, in review

    work page 2025

  11. [11]

    Integrated sensing and communications: Toward dual-functional wire- less networks for 6G and beyond,

    F. Liu, Y . Cui, C. Masouros, J. Xu, T. X. Han, Y . C. Eldar, and S. Buzzi, “Integrated sensing and communications: Toward dual-functional wire- less networks for 6G and beyond,”IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., vol. 40, no. 6, pp. 1728–1767, June 2022

    work page 2022

  12. [12]

    Weather estimation for in- tegrated sensing and communication,

    V . Palhares, A. Grudnitsky, and S. Mandelli, “Weather estimation for in- tegrated sensing and communication,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.15145, 2026

    work page arXiv 2026

  13. [13]

    Intensity estimation after detection for accumulated rainfall estimation,

    T. Weiss, T. Routtenberg, J. Ostrometzky, and H. Messer, “Intensity estimation after detection for accumulated rainfall estimation,”Frontiers Signal Process., vol. 4, p. 1291878, 2024

    work page 2024

  14. [14]

    On the fundamental tradeoff of integrated sensing and communications under Gaussian channels,

    Y . Xiong, F. Liu, Y . Cui, W. Yuan, T. X. Han, and G. Caire, “On the fundamental tradeoff of integrated sensing and communications under Gaussian channels,”IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 69, no. 9, pp. 5723– 5751, Sept. 2023, 2025 IEEE ComSoc-IT Joint Paper Award

    work page 2023

  15. [15]

    MIMO integrated sensing and communication exploiting prior information,

    C. Xu and S. Zhang, “MIMO integrated sensing and communication exploiting prior information,”IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., vol. 42, no. 9, pp. 2306–2321, Sept. 2024

    work page 2024

  16. [16]

    DebriSense: THz-based integrated sensing and communications (ISAC) for debris detection and classification in the Internet of Space (IoS),

    H. Dong and O. B. Akan, “DebriSense: THz-based integrated sensing and communications (ISAC) for debris detection and classification in the Internet of Space (IoS),”IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 24, no. 11, pp. 9282–9295, Nov. 2025

    work page 2025

  17. [17]

    Integrating atmospheric sensing and communications for resource allocation in ntns,

    I. Leyva-Mayorga, F. Saggese, L. Li, and P. Popovski, “Integrating atmospheric sensing and communications for resource allocation in ntns,”IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol. 24, no. 11, pp. 9703–9718, 2025

    work page 2025

  18. [18]

    Environment-to-link ISAC with space-weather sensing for Ka-band LEO downlinks,

    H. Wang, H. Dong, H. Cai, and O. B. Akan, “Environment-to-link ISAC with space-weather sensing for Ka-band LEO downlinks,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.00820, 2026

    work page arXiv 2026

  19. [19]

    A Cram ´er–Rao based study of 2-D fields retrieval by measurements from a random sensor network,

    S. Sagiv and H. Messer, “A Cram ´er–Rao based study of 2-D fields retrieval by measurements from a random sensor network,” inProc. IEEE Int. Conf. Acoust., Speech, Signal Process. Workshops (ICASSPW), June 2023

    work page 2023

  20. [20]

    H. L. Van Trees,Detection, Estimation, and Modulation Theory, Part I. New York, NY , USA: John Wiley & Sons, 1968

    work page 1968

  21. [21]

    A radar application of a modified Cram ´er–Rao bound: Param- eter estimation in non-Gaussian clutter,

    F. Gini, “A radar application of a modified Cram ´er–Rao bound: Param- eter estimation in non-Gaussian clutter,”IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 46, no. 7, pp. 1945–1953, July 1998

    work page 1945

  22. [22]

    Active uplink sensing beamformer design via bayesian cram ´er-rao bound dual optimization,

    N. Ghaddar and W. Yu, “Active uplink sensing beamformer design via bayesian cram ´er-rao bound dual optimization,” inICC 2025-IEEE International Conference on Communications. IEEE, 2025, pp. 5736– 5741

    work page 2025

  23. [23]

    Signal structure of the Starlink Ku-band downlink,

    T. E. Humphreys, P. A. Iannucci, Z. M. Komodromos, and A. M. Graff, “Signal structure of the Starlink Ku-band downlink,”IEEE Trans. Aerosp. Electron. Syst., vol. 59, no. 5, pp. 6016–6030, Oct. 2023

    work page 2023

  24. [24]

    Recommendation ITU-R P.676-13: Attenuation by atmospheric gases and related effects,

    ITU-R, “Recommendation ITU-R P.676-13: Attenuation by atmospheric gases and related effects,” 2022, international Telecommunication Union, Geneva, Switzerland

    work page 2022

  25. [25]

    Recommendation ITU-R P.840-9: Attenuation due to clouds and fog,

    ——, “Recommendation ITU-R P.840-9: Attenuation due to clouds and fog,” 2023, international Telecommunication Union, Geneva, Switzer- land

    work page 2023

  26. [26]

    Recommendation ITU-R P.618-14: Propagation data and pre- diction methods required for the design of Earth-space telecommunica- tion systems,

    ——, “Recommendation ITU-R P.618-14: Propagation data and pre- diction methods required for the design of Earth-space telecommunica- tion systems,” 2023, international Telecommunication Union, Geneva, Switzerland

    work page 2023

  27. [27]

    Recommendation ITU-R P.839-4: Rain height model for predic- tion methods,

    ——, “Recommendation ITU-R P.839-4: Rain height model for predic- tion methods,” 2013, international Telecommunication Union, Geneva, Switzerland

    work page 2013

  28. [28]

    On the lognormality of rain rate,

    B. Kedem and L. S. Chiu, “On the lognormality of rain rate,”Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA, vol. 84, no. 4, pp. 901–905, Feb. 1987

    work page 1987

  29. [29]

    How much training is needed in multiple-antenna wireless links?

    B. Hassibi and B. M. Hochwald, “How much training is needed in multiple-antenna wireless links?”IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 49, no. 4, pp. 951–963, Apr. 2003

    work page 2003

  30. [30]

    Channel estimation for LEO satellite massive MIMO OFDM communications,

    K.-X. Li, X. Gao, and X.-G. Xia, “Channel estimation for LEO satellite massive MIMO OFDM communications,”IEEE Trans. Wireless Com- mun., vol. 22, no. 11, pp. 7537–7550, Nov. 2023

    work page 2023

  31. [31]

    Ku-band satellite signals for rain rate estimation: Performance limits and 215-link validation,

    H. Dong and O. B. Akan, “Ku-band satellite signals for rain rate estimation: Performance limits and 215-link validation,” 2026, submitted to Eur. Microw. Conf. (EuMC) 2026, London, UK

    work page 2026

  32. [32]

    Applications of the van Trees inequality: A Bayesian Cram ´er–Rao bound,

    R. D. Gill and B. Y . Levit, “Applications of the van Trees inequality: A Bayesian Cram ´er–Rao bound,”Bernoulli, vol. 1, no. 1–2, pp. 59–79, 1995

    work page 1995

  33. [33]

    Asymptotically tight Bayesian Cram ´er–Rao bound,

    O. Aharon and J. Tabrikian, “Asymptotically tight Bayesian Cram ´er–Rao bound,”IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 72, pp. 3333–3346, 2024

    work page 2024

  34. [34]

    Posterior Cram ´er– Rao bounds for discrete-time nonlinear filtering,

    P. Tichavsk ´y, C. H. Muravchik, and A. Nehorai, “Posterior Cram ´er– Rao bounds for discrete-time nonlinear filtering,”IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 46, no. 5, pp. 1386–1396, May 1998

    work page 1998

  35. [35]

    Continuous inspection schemes,

    E. S. Page, “Continuous inspection schemes,”Biometrika, vol. 41, no. 1–2, pp. 100–115, June 1954

    work page 1954

  36. [36]

    Procedures for reacting to a change in distribution,

    G. Lorden, “Procedures for reacting to a change in distribution,”Ann. Math. Statist., vol. 42, no. 6, pp. 1897–1908, Dec. 1971

    work page 1908

  37. [37]

    Optimal stopping times for detecting changes in distributions,

    G. V . Moustakides, “Optimal stopping times for detecting changes in distributions,”Ann. Statist., vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 1379–1387, Dec. 1986

    work page 1986

  38. [38]

    Rainfall estimation from a German-wide commercial microwave link network: optimized processing and validation for 1 year of data,

    M. Graf, C. Chwala, J. Polz, and H. Kunstmann, “Rainfall estimation from a German-wide commercial microwave link network: optimized processing and validation for 1 year of data,”Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., vol. 24, pp. 2931–2950, 2020

    work page 2020