A significant uncertainty in assessments of the role of clouds in climate is the characterization of the full distribution of their sizes. Order-of-magnitude disagreements exist among observations of key distribution parameters, particularly power law exponents and the range over which they apply. A study by Savre and Craig (2023) suggested that the discrepancies are due in large part to inaccurate fitting methods: they recommended the use of a maximum likelihood estimation technique rather than a linear regression to a logarithmically transformed histogram of cloud sizes. Here, we counter that linear regression is both simpler and equally accurate, provided the simple precaution is followed that bins containing fewer than ∼ 24 counts are omitted from the regression. A much more significant and underappreciated source of error is how to treat clouds that are truncated by the edges of unavoidably finite measurement domains. We offer a simple computational procedure to identify and correct for domain size effects, with potential application to any geometric size distribution of objects, whether physical, ecological, social or mathematical.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
DeWitt et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: