remote sensing

Review
Precipitation Monitoring Using Commercial Microwave Links:
Current Status, Challenges and Prospectives
Peng Zhang 1 , Xichuan Liu 1,2, * and Kang Pu 1

1 College of Meteorology and Oceanography, National University of Defense Technology,

Changsha 410073, China; [email protected] (P.Z.); [email protected] (K.P.)
2 High Impact Weather Key Laboratory of China Meteorological Administration, Changsha 410073, China
* Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +86-13-4518-56639

Abstract: As rainfall exhibits high spatiotemporal variability, accurate and real-time rainfall moni-
toring is vitally important in fields such as hydrometeorological research, agriculture and disaster
prevention and control. Nevertheless, the current dedicated rain sensors cannot fulfill the requirement
for comprehensive precipitation observation, owing to their respective limitations. Within the last
two decades, the utilization of commercial microwave links (CMLs) for rainfall estimation, as an
opportunistic sensing method, has generated considerable attention. Relying on CML networks
deployed and maintained by mobile network operators can provide near-surface precipitation in-
formation over large areas at a low cost. Although scholars have developed several algorithms for
obtaining rainfall estimates from CML data, the rainfall estimation technique based on CMLs remains
challenging due to the complex effect in the microwave radiation transmission process. In this paper,
we provide a comprehensive review of the technical principles, developments and workflows for
this technology, alongside its application in environmental monitoring and hydrological modeling.
Furthermore, this paper outlines the current challenges and future research directions, which will
hopefully draw the attention of researchers and provide valuable guidance.

Keywords: commercial microwave links (CMLs); opportunistic sensing; rainfall estimation;

environment monitoring; remote sensing
Citation: Zhang, P.; Liu, X.; Pu, K.
Precipitation Monitoring Using
Commercial Microwave Links:
Current Status, Challenges and 1. Introduction
Prospectives. Remote Sens. 2023, 15, 1.1. Background
4821. https://doi.org/10.3390/
Precipitation, as one of the most significant links in the Earth’s water cycle, is intimately
rs15194821
associated with people’s lives. The spatial and temporal heterogeneity of precipitation
Academic Editors: Xiantong Liu, development is the main cause of natural disasters such as droughts, floods and mud-
Hao Huang and Silke Trömel slides [1]. Accurate monitoring of precipitation has significant implications in fields such
Received: 28 August 2023
as agriculture, hydrometeorological research and water resource management.
Revised: 1 October 2023 Currently, meteorological operations mainly rely on rain gauges, weather radar and
Accepted: 2 October 2023 meteorological satellites to measure precipitation. However, due to the inherent limitations
Published: 4 October 2023 of these dedicated rain sensors, quantitative precipitation products still cannot satisfy the
requirements of comprehensive meteorological observations, especially as global warming
may lead to more extreme precipitation events [2]. Rain gauges, which are believed to
provide point measurements of surface rainfall, are unsuitable for constructing a monitoring
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors. network due to their low spatial representativeness. In addition, wind and splash effects
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
introduce uncertainties in its measurement [3]. Contrary to rain gauges, based on the
This article is an open access article
statistical power–law relationship between the radar reflectivity Z and the rain rate R,
distributed under the terms and
weather radar allows for quantitative precipitation estimation (QPE) over large areas.
conditions of the Creative Commons
However, the parameters of the Z–R relationship are highly sensitive to the raindrop
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
size distribution (DSD) associated with precipitation types, geographical locations and
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
climatic characteristics, which may cause large systematic biases [4]. Other uncertainty

Remote Sens. 2023, 15, 4821. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15194821 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/remotesensing

Remote Sens. 2023, 15, 4821 2 of 30

sources include ground clutter, beam blockage, bright bands and the vertical variability
of the precipitation system [5]. As meteorological satellite technology matures, satellites
can measure precipitation almost globally, which is especially important in areas where
radar and rain gauges are not available [6]. However, subject to low spatial and temporal
resolution, satellite products are not available for small-scale hydrological applications,
such as catchment modeling in urban and mountainous areas. Moreover, although several
satellite-based rainfall inversion algorithms have been developed [7,8], the accuracy of
their estimates still needs to be improved [9].
Consequently, the concept of opportunistic rainfall measurement methods emerged,
and the potential of devices such as commercial microwave links (CMLs) [10], personal
weather stations [11], vehicle windscreen wipers [12] and street cameras [13] has been
successively explored. These methods can provide additional precipitation information
and promise to improve dedicated precipitation products, with CMLs being one that has
the most prospective application. Based on existing CML networks built and maintained
by mobile network operators, it can provide alternative precipitation observations in a cost-
effective manner in areas lacking rain sensors [14] or additional precipitation information
in areas with existing rainfall observations to enhance the spatial and temporal resolution
as well as the accuracy of precipitation products [15,16].

1.2. The Principle and Development of Rainfall Estimation by CMLs

CMLs typically provide line-of-sight wireless backhaul connectivity for cellular com-
munication networks, as well as serving as infrastructure for services such as smart cities.
As shown in Figure 1, CMLs transmit microwave signals which carry data information
between two cell towers to achieve message communication at two locations. Currently,
the operating frequencies of CMLs mainly range from 15 to 40 GHz and are extending
to the E-band due to the demand for higher bandwidth. In these frequencies, where the
wavelengths are comparable to the size of the raindrop particles, the microwave signals are
significantly attenuated by scattering and absorption. Considering the rainfall at location x
on the path, the specific rain-induced attenuation γ(x) (dB·km−1 ) at that location can be
calculated as: Z
γ( x ) = 4.343 × 103 Qext ( D, f , T ) · Nx ( D )dD (1)
D

(m2 )
where Qext (D, f, T) is the extinction cross section of a raindrop particle of size D (mm),
which is related to the signal frequency f (GHz) and raindrop temperature T (K). Nx (D)
(m−3 ·mm−1 ), i.e., the DSD function, is the number concentration of raindrop particles of
size D at location x. Meanwhile, according to the definition of rain rate, the rain rate R(x)
(mm·h−1 ) at this location can be expressed as:
Z
R( x ) = 6 × 10−4 π V ( D ) Nx ( D ) D3 dD (2)
D

where V(D) (m·s−1 ) is the falling velocity of a raindrop of size D. Since both γ(x) and R(x)
are functions of Nx (D), the relationship between the two can be deduced. The theoretical
calculation results show that the relationship between γ and R approximates a power–law
form [17]:
γ( x ) = aR( x )b (3)
where a (mm−b ·hb ·dB·km−1 ) and b (dimensionless) are the power–law parameters, which
are associated with frequency, polarization and, to a lesser extent, with DSD [18,19] (com-
pared to the Z–R relationship). The total attenuation A (dB) of a CML of length L (km) due
to rainfall on the path can be obtained by integrating γ(x) over the path:
Z L Z L
A= γ( x )dx = a R( x )b dx (4)
0 0
 the operating frequencies of CMLs mainly range from 15 to 40 GHz and are extendin
the E-band due to the demand for higher bandwidth. In these frequencies, where
wavelengths are comparable to the size of the raindrop particles, the microwave sig
are significantly attenuated by scattering and absorption. Considering the rainfall at l
Remote Sens. 2023, 15, 4821 tion x on the path, the specific rain-induced attenuation γ(x) (dB·km−1) at that location
3 of 30

be calculated as:

Figure
Figure 1.1.The
Thebasic
basic principle
principle of estimating
of estimating rainfallrainfall usingCMLs
using CMLs. CMLs. CMLsconnect
typically typically
twoconnect
cell two
towers and carry information via microwave signals to enable data exchange between the two
towers and carry information via microwave signals to enable data exchange between the two
tions. When
locations. When rainfall
rainfalloccurs onthe
occurs on theCML
CML path,
path, the the received
received signalsignal is significantly
is significantly attenuated attenuated
due du
scattering and absorption of the wave by raindrop particles. The path-averaged rain
to scattering and absorption of the wave by raindrop particles. The path-averaged rain rate can be rate ca
retrieved based on the power–law relationship between rain rate and rain-induced attenuation.
retrieved based on the power–law relationship between rain rate and rain-induced attenuation
Then, the specific rain-induced attenuation over the entire CML path can be expressed as:

γ( x) =
4.343
γ=
A ×a 10
= ∫ extb
Z L3 Q ( D , f , T ) ⋅ N ( D)dD
x
RD( x ) dx (5)
L L 0

Substitute Equation (3) into (5) to obtain an estimate R̂ of the path-averaged rain rate,
with the real path-averaged rain rate R shown by Equation (7):
RL !1/b
0 R( x )b dx
R̂ = (6)
L
Z L
1
R= R( x )dx (7)
L 0
Figure 2 presents the scatter plot of CML rainfall estimates versus real rain rates at
different frequencies and rainfall types. It can be seen that the deviation between the CML
rain rate and the real rain rate is much larger for frequencies outside of 22 to 38 GHz.
Comparing the path-averaged rain rate, R, with R̂, it is straightforward to realize that the
two are equal only if b approximates unity or R(x) is nearly constant. This means that taking
into account the spatial variability of rainfall, only CMLs operating within 20 to 40 GHz are
suitable for rainfall estimation. However, in the last century, the low frequency of prevalent
CMLs was not applicable for monitoring rainfall. This is reflected in the insensitivity of
the microwave signal to rainfall on the one hand, and due to the inherent error between
the rainfall estimate R̂ and the path-averaged rain rate R on the other. In addition, it is too
expensive to deploy a dedicated microwave link rainfall monitoring network compared to
radar-based regional measurements. As a result, studies 20 years ago were mainly limited to
dedicated experimental microwave links. Based on a multi-band dual-polarized microwave
link of the Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission (TRMM), Rincon et al. [20] demonstrated
the validity of the power–law relationship for rainfall estimation; subsequently, scientists
further found that estimating rain rate using dual-frequency differential attenuation has a
higher stability than single-frequency does [21–24].
The landmark breakthrough in this technology occurred around 2006. As we enter
the 21st century, the growing demand for wireless network terminals, such as cellphones,
Remote Sens. 2023, 15, 4821 4 of 30

has led to a dramatic increase in the number of CMLs with operating frequencies ranging
from 20 to 40 GHz. The mobile network operators who installed and maintained these
CMLs have established an adequate infrastructure for monitoring rainfall using CMLs.
As a result, the large quantity of CMLs that are otherwise used for communications can
Remote Sens. 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW
be used as opportunistic sensors, and the signal impairments that are undesirable4 of 31
to
telecommunication engineers instead become an additional source of rainfall information.

Figure
Figure2.2.Two-dimensional
Two-dimensionalscatterscatterplots
plotsobtained
obtainedfrom
fromreal
realrain
rainrates
ratesand
andrainrainrates
ratesinverted
invertedbybythe
the
γ–R relation at frequencies (a) 6 GHz, (b) 10 GHz, (c) 15 GHz, (d) 18 GHz, (e) 22 GHz, (f) 26 GHz,
γ–R relation at frequencies (a) 6 GHz, (b) 10 GHz, (c) 15 GHz, (d) 18 GHz, (e) 22 GHz, (f) 26 GHz,
(g) 38 GHz, (h) 50 GHz, (i) 60 GHz, (j) 73 GHz, (k) 83 GHz and (l) 92 GHz. It is worth noting that
(g) 38 GHz, (h) 50 GHz, (i) 60 GHz, (j) 73 GHz, (k) 83 GHz and (l) 92 GHz. It is worth noting that
the real rain rates are obtained from an OTT Parsivel disdrometer deployed in Nanjing, whereas the
the real rainrain
CML-based ratesrates
are obtained from an OTT
are simulatively Parsivel
calculated disdrometer
using deployed
the T-matrix in Nanjing,
algorithm based whereas the
on the γ–R
relationship and the DSD data recorded by the disdrometer. The rainfall types are identified using
CML-based rain rates are simulatively calculated using the T-matrix algorithm based on the γ–R
the disdrometer
relationship and data according
the DSD to the classification
data recorded criteria The
by the disdrometer. proposed [25].are
rainfallintypes (Reprinted
identifiedwith
usingper-
the
mission fromdata
disdrometer Pu etaccording
al., 2023. to
Copyright 2023 IEEE).
the classification criteria proposed in [25]. (Reprinted with permission
from Pu et al., 2023. Copyright 2023 IEEE).
The landmark breakthrough in this technology occurred around 2006. As we enter
the 21st century,
In Israel, the growing
Messer et al. [10]demand
used CMLs for wireless
to estimatenetwork
rainfallterminals,
for the firstsuch
timeas cellphones,
and compared
them with rain gauges and radar, demonstrating the potential of CMLs.
has led to a dramatic increase in the number of CMLs with operating frequencies ranging Almost simulta-
from 20 to 40 GHz. The mobile network operators who installed and maintained CMLs
neously, a rainfall inversion experiment in the Netherlands [26] also suggested that these
could have
CMLs be anestablished
effective complement
an adequate toinfrastructure
radar QPE. Later, experimental
for monitoring studies
rainfall on the
using estima-
CMLs. As
ation of rainfall
result, using
the large CMLs have
quantity successively
of CMLs that are been carried
otherwise out for
used in France [27], Germany
communications can[28],
be
Switzerland
used [29,30], thesensors,
as opportunistic Czech Republic [31], Italy
and the signal [32], Brazilthat
impairments [33],are
China [34,35], SritoLanka
undesirable [36],
telecom-
some countries
munication in Africa
engineers [37–39],
instead etc., asan
become shown in Figure
additional 3. of rainfall information.
source
In Israel, Messer et al. [10] used CMLs to estimate rainfall for the first time and com-
pared them with rain gauges and radar, demonstrating the potential of CMLs. Almost
simultaneously, a rainfall inversion experiment in the Netherlands [26] also suggested
that CMLs could be an effective complement to radar QPE. Later, experimental studies on
the estimation of rainfall using CMLs have successively been carried out in France [27],
Germany [28], Switzerland [29,30], the Czech Republic [31], Italy [32], Brazil [33], China
 RemoteSens.
Remote Sens.2023, 15,4821
2023,15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 55 of
of 30
31

Figure 3. World map with the main countries that have researched rainfall measurement techniques
Figure 3. World map with the main countries that have researched rainfall measurement techniques
based on CMLs. Notably, Antarctica and the Arctic have been omitted from the figure. In addition,
based on CMLs. Notably, Antarctica and the Arctic have been omitted from the figure. In addition,
the number of research is based on the references in this paper, which may not fully encompass all
the numberstudies
published of research is based
but can reflecton the
the references indistribution.
approximate this paper, which may not fully encompass all
published studies but can reflect the approximate distribution.
This paper provides a detailed overview of the techniques for rainfall estimation
This paper provides a detailed overview of the techniques for rainfall estimation
based on CMLs, in contrast to previous review articles [40–43], with the aim of providing
based on CMLs, in contrast to previous review articles [40–43], with the aim of providing a
a comprehensive introduction to readers new to the field and offering researchers our
comprehensive introduction to readers new to the field and offering researchers our view of
view of current challenges and future research directions for the technique. The rest of
current challenges and future research directions for the technique. The rest of this paper is
this paper is organized as follows: Section 2 details the processes involved in obtaining
organized as follows: Section 2 details the processes involved in obtaining rainfall estimates
rainfall estimates from the attenuation information of the CMLs. Other applications of
from the attenuation information of the CMLs. Other applications of CMLs as opportunistic
CMLs as opportunistic sensors are discussed in Section 3. Section 4 summarizes the cur-
sensors are discussed in Section 3. Section 4 summarizes the current challenges. In Section 5
rent
we challenges.
present In future
possible Sectiondirections.
5 we present possible
Section futureadirections.
6 provides conclusionSection 6 provides a
and outlook.
conclusion and outlook.
2. Procedures in Deriving Rainfall Maps from Attenuation
2. Procedures in Deriving Rainfall Maps from Attenuation
When the path of CMLs is exposed to rainfall, additional attenuation of the microwave
signalWhen
occursthe path of CMLs
accordingly. is exposed
However, theseto rainfall, additional
attenuation increments attenuation of the due
are not entirely micro-
to
wave signal
scattering andoccurs accordingly.
absorption However,
by raindrop these
particles. attenuation
Phenomena increments
such are component
as electronic not entirely
due to
drift, scattering
changes and vapor,
in water absorption by raindrop
multipath effects, particles. Phenomena
and wet antenna effectssuch
can as
alsoelectronic
lead to
component
changes drift,quality.
in signal changesDeriving
in waterrainfall
vapor,estimates
multipathfrom effects,
CMLand wet antenna
attenuation effects can
is, therefore, a
also lead to changes in signal quality. Deriving rainfall
sophisticated process, which is described in detail in this section. estimates from CML attenuation
is, therefore, a sophisticated process, which is described in detail in this section.
2.1. Classification of Dry and Wet Periods
2.1. Classification
As mentioned of above,
Dry andphenomena
Wet Periods other than or triggered by rainfall may also cause
signalAs mentioned above, phenomena
impairment. Therefore, when weother
obtain than or triggered
attenuation databyfor
rainfall
CMLs, may also cause
typically the
signal impairment. Therefore, when we obtain attenuation data for CMLs, typically the
transmitted signal level (TSL) minus the received signal level (RSL), the first critical issue is
transmitted signal level (TSL) minus the received signal level (RSL), the first critical issue
to determine at each timestamp whether the CMLs are affected by rainfall. More simply,
is toCML
the determine at each
data need to betimestamp
classified whether
into dry the
(rainCMLs
free) are
andaffected by rainfall.
wet (rainy) periods. More simply,
In order to
the CML data need to be classified into dry (rain free) and wet (rainy) periods. In order to
Remote Sens. 2023, 15, 4821 6 of 30

accomplish the classification of dry and wet periods, scholars have developed a variety of
methods, which can be broadly divided into three categories.
The first category is based on the analysis of attenuation sequences to determine whether
rainfall exists on the path of CMLs. The simplest way to distinguish between dry and wet
periods is based on a global threshold for attenuation, with periods above the threshold
being treated as wet [44]. Rahimi et al. [23] found that RSL sequences of dual-frequency
microwave links are highly correlated during wet periods and suggested setting correlation
thresholds to distinguish between dry and wet periods. Further, Overeem et al. [45] extended
the spatial correlation of rainfall from individual CMLs to all CMLs within a certain range and
proposed the so-called nearby link approach (NLA). They considered a time period as wet if
the RSLs of at least half of the CMLs in the range decreased simultaneously during that time
period. In addition, Schleiss et al. [27] found significant differences in the local variability of
signal attenuation between dry and wet periods and proposed the use of a rolling window to
calculate the standard deviation of the attenuation sequence to identify dry and wet periods
based on a predetermined threshold. Recently, Graf et al. [46] proposed an improved version
of this algorithm, arguing that the threshold can depend on the fluctuating trend of individual
CMLs rather than only on climatology. Based on the short-time Fourier transform of the RSL
sequence, Chwala et al. [28] found that the normalized amplitude difference between low and
high frequencies of the power spectrum can be used to determine the dry and wet periods.
The second category of classification methods relies on dedicated rainfall observations
in the vicinity of CMLs. As near-surface rainfall measurement instruments, rain gauges are
widely used to achieve dry/wet period classification for CMLs [47,48]. In the literature [49],
considering the elevation angle of the radar, if the path-averaged rain rate of the radar
QPE is greater than 0.1 mm/h, the current and subsequent time steps are regarded as wet
periods. Kumah et al. [50,51] utilized Meteosat Second Generation satellites to check for
the presence of rain areas in the path of CMLs.
The last category is data-driven approaches based on machine learning. Thanks
to the massive data, they can derive hidden feature information to explore patterns of
signal fluctuations and apply them to dry and wet period classification. Reller et al. [52]
demonstrated the applicability of a factor graph-based quasi-periodic signal model for dry
and wet period classification. The literature [53,54] reported cases where Markov models
were employed to determine dry and wet periods. In addition, dry/wet classification
based on the multifamily likelihood ratio test [55] and the kernel Fisher discriminant
analysis [56] have been attempted. Subsequently, time-delay neural networks [57], long
short-term memory neural networks (LSTM) [58,59], support vector machines (SVM) [60]
and convolutional neural networks (CNN) [61] are also used for dry and wet period
identification for CMLs. In [62], the dry and wet period classification performance of several
machine learning models was compared and the ensemble machine learning classifier was
recommended as the preferred one. Additional information on existing dry and wet period
classification algorithms can be found in Table 1.

Table 1. Existing techniques for dry and wet period classification.

Authors and
Country Highlights
Year
The RSL sequences of dual-frequency CMLs were found to increase in correlation
Rahimi et al. during the wet period, and a correlation threshold was used to distinguish between
England
(2003) [23] dry and wet periods. The classification method detected approximately 80% of dry
periods and 92.5% of wet periods.
Rain gauge data in the vicinity of CMLs were used to differentiate between dry and
Upton et al. wet periods and compared with the classification method of dual-frequency CMLs.
England
(2005) [48] The use of nearby rain gauge data could well improve the dry and wet period
classification of dual-frequency CMLs.
Remote Sens. 2023, 15, 4821 7 of 30

Table 1. Cont.

Authors and Year Country Highlights

Leijnse et al. Based on the historical data, a simple global threshold was constructed and the portion above the
The Netherlands
(2007) [44] threshold was treated as wet periods.
Based on the different local variability of dry/wet period attenuation, the standard deviation of
Schleiss et al. attenuation was calculated using a rolling window to differentiate between dry and wet periods
France
(2010) [27] according to a preset threshold. On average, 92% of wet periods, 86% of dry periods and 93% of
total rainfall were identified.
Radar data were used to distinguish between dry and wet periods; considering that the
Overeem et al. correlation of RSL sequences of nearby CMLs in wet periods rises, the nearby link approach
The Netherlands
(2011) [49] (NLA) was proposed to distinguish between dry and wet periods. Both radar and NLA were
able to invert rainfall accurately with similar results.
Reller et al. The Gaussian factor graph was used to distinguish between the dry and wet periods. Case
Switzerland
(2011) [52] studies showed that the proposed method has a high classification performance.
Due to the significant increase in the high-frequency components of the signal during the wet
Chwala et al. period, a spectral analysis method based on the short-time Fourier transform was proposed to
Germany
(2012) [28] classify dry and wet periods. The weighted mean error rate of the classification results was as
low as 0.098.
A Markov switching model was used to differentiate between dry and wet periods, which was
compared with rolling standard deviation, factor graphs and the global threshold method. The
Wang et al.
Switzerland false-positive and false-negative rates were about 8% and 15%, respectively, in the case of a
(2012) [54]
stationary baseline. In the case of an unstable baseline, the false-positive and false-negative rates
were about 5% and 23%, respectively.
Rayitsfeld et al. A Hidden Markov Model was used to determine the dry and wet periods. Rainfall inversions
Israel
(2012) [53] using this method showed good correlation and low bias compared with rain gauge results.
Based on the statistical characteristics of attenuation, a linear Fisher’s discriminant was used to
Cherkassky et al.
Israel distinguish between dry and wet periods and was able to identify 83% of wet periods, with a
(2012) [63]
false-positive rate of 12%.
Harel et al. An algorithm based on a multifamily likelihood ratio test was used to separate dry and wet
Israel
(2013) [55] periods, and the true-positive rate could reach about 90%.
Focused time-delay neural networks were used to distinguish between dry and wet periods. The
Dordević et al.
Germany average test error of the classification results was only 1.1095%, with a correlation coefficient
(2013) [57]
of 0.9647.
Based on the statistical characteristics of attenuation, the kernel Fisher’s discrimination was used
Cherkassky et al.
Israel to distinguish dry and wet periods. The results showed that the classification accuracy could
(2014) [56]
reach 85.35%.
He et al. A dry and wet period classification algorithm based on LSTM was proposed. The daily
China
(2019) [59] classification accuracy exceeded 60%, with some results achieving up to 98%.
Polz et al. A dry and wet period classification algorithm based on CNN was proposed. An average of 76%
Germany
(2020) [61] wet periods and 97% dry periods were detected in the validation results.
SVM was used to distinguish between dry and wet periods based on statistical features of
Song et al.
China attenuation. The classification accuracy exceeded 0.8 and the majority of the outcomes displayed
(2020) [60]
true-positive and false-positive rates that exceeded 0.9 and were less than 0.2, respectively.
Kumah et al. Satellite data were used to identify rain areas along the CML path. The accuracy of rainfall
Kenya
(2020) [50] inversion for CMLs supported by satellite data was high.

2.2. Determination of Baseline

After the classification of dry and wet periods, the wet period attenuation cannot be
used directly for rainfall inversion; instead, the baseline attenuation (also known as the zero-
level attenuation), which consists mainly of free-space losses and gas attenuation, needs to
be removed from the wet period attenuation. Considering the generally short duration of
rainfall, a common assumption is that factors affecting baseline attenuation may differ little
between the wet period and the preceding dry period. Thus, the baseline can be set as the
most recent dry period attenuation prior to rainfall [23] or the average dry period attenuation
over a period of time before and after the rainfall event [64] and kept constant during the
wet period. However, a constant baseline during the wet period may be impractical. To
reflect the variability of the baseline during the wet period, Upton et al. [48] linearly interpo-
lated the dry period attenuation at both ends of the rainfall event to determine the baseline.
Remote Sens. 2023, 15, 4821 8 of 30

Fenicia et al. [65] compared a single-parameter baseline model based on a low-pass linear
filter with a constant baseline model and found the former to have superior performance.
Based on the temporal distribution of rainfall, the baseline can also be estimated as the median
of all dry period attenuation over a long period prior to the wet period [45].
Furthermore, some baseline estimation algorithms have been developed that do not
require dry and wet period classification. Assuming that the rain rate is a random process,
Ostrometzky et al. [66] demonstrated that information about the baseline is hidden in
the minimum attenuation and suggested using a sliding window to estimate the baseline.
For the median attenuation method described above, the baseline can be estimated as the
median of all attenuations by utilizing a sufficiently large window without the need for
dry/wet classification because the window can contain more dry-period samples [45,47].

2.3. Wet Antenna Attenuation (WAA) Correction

Rainfall not only scatters and absorbs microwaves, but other phenomena associated
with it, such as increased water vapor, decreased temperature and antenna wetting, can
lead to additional attenuation that cannot be eliminated by the baseline. Considering that
attenuation due to temperature and water vapor variations is typically one to two orders of
magnitude smaller than rain-induced attenuation (with the possible exception of the water
vapor absorption band around 22 GHz), these can generally be ignored. However, the water
film covering antennas can change the antenna’s directivity, efficiency and reflectivity [67],
introducing additional attenuation up to a few dB. The lack of correction for wet antenna
attenuation (WAA) has been shown to lead to a significant overestimation of rainfall
estimates based on CMLs [26].
In order to eliminate the effect of WAA, an exponential model related to the measured
attenuation was proposed by Kharadly et al. [68]. Later, based on the fact that measured
attenuation consists of path attenuation and WAA, the literature [69] extended the expo-
nential WAA model to link it to path attenuation. Leijnse et al. [70] assumed a power–law
relationship between the water film thickness and the rain rate and calculated the WAA
based on the water film thickness and electromagnetic scattering theory. Some studies [71]
also treated WAA directly as a function of rain rate. Overeem et al. [49] suggested ignoring
the process of antenna wetting and drying and treating WAA as constant. On the contrary,
long antenna drying and wetting processes have also been observed, and time-dependent
dynamic WAA models have been proposed [29,72]. Pastorek et al. [73] compared the above
empirical models and found that the WAA model, which is directly related to the rain rate,
performs better, and that because the parameters of the model are independent of the CML
frequency and path length, it is portable to CMLs with similar antenna characteristics. In
the absence of rainfall observations, Fencl et al. [74] suggest that WAA can be quantified by
using short CMLs, or, if short CMLs are not available, by statistics from CMLs and rainfall
climatology. On the basis of the analysis of WAA time series, the LSTM algorithm [75] has
also been applied to WAA estimation. In addition, since WAA is mainly related to antenna
reflectivity, Moroder et al. [76] have developed a microwave measurement system that
can measure attenuation and WAA simultaneously, which may present opportunities for
WAA correction.

2.4. Calibration of the γ–R Relationship and Rainfall Estimation

For the coefficients a and b in the relationship between specific rain-induced at-
tenuation and rain rate, the International Telecommunication Union Recommendations
(ITU-R) [77] provide a reliable reference in the absence of microphysical information for
rainfall. However, the ITU-R model, as a statistical model fitted from global data, has been
found to potentially perform sub-optimally in localized areas in several reports [78–82].
As shown in Figure 4, for the Nanjing area, the ITU-R model would significantly over-
estimate rainfall under high rain rate conditions compared to the local γ–R relationship.
Therefore, based on T-matrix or the Mie scattering theory, some scholars have also utilized
DSD data to fit power–law parameters appropriate to the local climate. Using data from
 tion and rain rate, the International Telecommunication Union Recommendations (ITU-
R) [77] provide a reliable reference in the absence of microphysical information for rainfall.
However, the ITU-R model, as a statistical model fitted from global data, has been found
to potentially perform sub-optimally in localized areas in several reports [78–82]. As
shown in Figure 4, for the Nanjing area, the ITU-R model would significantly overestimate
Remote Sens. 2023, 15, 4821 rainfall under high rain rate conditions compared to the local γ–R relationship. Therefore, 9 of 30

based on T-matrix or the Mie scattering theory, some scholars have also utilized DSD data
to fit power–law parameters appropriate to the local climate. Using data from the dis-
drometer
the deployed
disdrometer in Nanjing,
deployed China,
in Nanjing, Song Song
China, et al.et[83] estimated
al. [83] estimatedrainfall using
rainfall the the
using im-
proved γ–R
improved γ–Rrelationship. The
relationship. study
The studyconcluded
concludedthat thethe
that results areare
results more accurate
more than
accurate the
than
ITU-R
the ITU-Rmodel
model and highlighted
and highlightedthe
thesignificance
significanceofofestablishing
establishingthe local γ–R
the local γ–R relationship.
relationship.
Hanet
Han etal.
al.[84]
[84]then
thenfit
fitthe
thepower–law
power–lawrelationship
relationshipforforstratiform
stratiformandandconvective
convectiverainfall
rainfall
separately, demonstrating superior performance over the ITU–R relationship.
separately, demonstrating superior performance over the ITU–R relationship.

Figure4.4.Scatter
Figure Scatterplots
plotsofofspecific
specificrain-induced
rain-inducedattenuation
attenuation and
and rain
rain rates
rates at at different
different frequencies.
frequencies. It isIt
is worth noting that the rain rates are obtained from an OTT Parsivel disdrometer deployed in Nan-
worth noting that the rain rates are obtained from an OTT Parsivel disdrometer deployed in Nanjing,
jing, whereas the specific rain-induced attenuations are simulated using the T-matrix algorithm
whereas the specific rain-induced attenuations are simulated using the T-matrix algorithm based on
based on the DSD data recorded by the disdrometer.
the DSD data recorded by the disdrometer.
After calibration of the power–law relationship, the path-averaged rain rate can be
After calibration of the power–law relationship, the path-averaged rain rate can be
estimated based on Equations (4) and (6):
estimated based on Equations (4) and (6):
1/ b
b ≈1
A 
1ˆ (8)
1/b
b≈R=A

 
R̂ =
aL aL
  (8)

2.5. Rainfall Mapping

Although line-integrated rainfall observations are certainly valuable for many hy-
drometeorological studies and applications, the need to provide the spatial distribution
of rainfall, i.e., generate rainfall maps from the estimations of CMLs, is more necessary.
The simplest approach is to treat the CMLs as virtual rain gauges located at their midpoint
location [45]. However, such an assumption is not reasonable given the heterogeneity of
rainfall over the path of long-distance CMLs. Therefore, Goldshtein et al. [85] proposed an
iterative algorithm to represent CML measurements using multiple data points along the
path. Several studies [86,87] compared the two strategies and found that the dominance
of the latter is positively correlated with the spatial variability of rainfall. Then, spatial
interpolation techniques such as inverse distance weighting (IDW) and ordinary kriging
(OK) can be employed to reconstruct sparse rainfall estimates to continuous spatial distri-
bution. Eshel et al. [88] quantitatively analyzed the performance of different interpolation
Remote Sens. 2023, 15, 4821 10 of 30

algorithms. The results showed the OK algorithm, which uses more priori information,
performs slightly better than IDW. More sophisticated algorithms that consider rainfall
inhomogeneity over the paths of CMLs include tomographic analysis techniques [32,89,90],
the block kriging type approach [91], stochastic reconstruction algorithms [92,93] and the
compressed sensing theory [94–97]. Furthermore, the literature [98] reported that CMLs
can provide information on the spatial structure of rainfall fields and that the error in the
estimation of the spatial autocorrelation function is only 5%.

3. Other Applications
3.1. Environmental Monitoring Other Than Rainfall Estimation
Due to the interaction of microwaves with the atmosphere during transmission, the
signals of CMLs carry atmospheric environmental information. On the basis of electromagnetic
theory, considering the absorption bands of different atmospheric variables separately, CMLs
can theoretically invert atmospheric variables for the purpose of environmental monitoring.

3.1.1. Monitoring Phenomena Related to Water Vapor

The method of monitoring water vapor using CMLs that are operating at the water
vapor absorption band around 22 GHz was first proposed by David et al. [99], whereas
Chwala et al. [100] and Montomoli et al. [101] also suggested the use of phase delay and
normalized differential spectral attenuation to measure absolute humidity, respectively.
Subsequently, Alpert et al. [102] generated daily moisture fields in Israel, and the results
were in better agreement with ground-based observations than the current weather predic-
tion product. With the expansion of microwave frequencies, the potential of E-band CMLs
to monitor near-surface water vapor was demonstrated in [103]. In addition, deep learning
methods have also been applied to water vapor estimation by CMLs. Song et al. [104]
trained an SVM model using prior data from RSL and water vapor density to mitigate the
estimation error introduced by the process of extracting water vapor attenuation from RSL.
Pu et al. [105] achieved high temporal resolution (5-min) water vapor retrieval based on
E-band CMLs using an LSTM deep learning model. More studies using CMLs for water
vapor estimation can be found in the literature [106–109]. In addition to these, CMLs have
been shown to be valid in recognizing and measuring fog [110–112] and dew [113].

3.1.2. DSD Estimation

Assuming that the DSD follows a gamma distribution, Rincon et al. [21] and
Berne et al. [114] estimated the average DSD over the path using dual-frequency and
dual-polarized microwave links, respectively, which was in good agreement with the refer-
ence measurements. However, the above studies simplify the three-parameter model of
DSD by setting a fixed shape parameter in the former and defining the slope parameter
as a function of the shape parameter in the latter. This may lead to inherent errors in the
algorithm. Therefore, a three-parameter estimation model for DSD based on dual-frequency,
dual-polarized CMLs has been proposed in the literature [115]. Van Leth et al. [116] com-
pared the three-parameter and two-parameter models for DSD estimation and found that
the three-parameter model has limited superiority and slower retrieval.

3.1.3. Precipitation Type Identification

By analyzing the different attenuation patterns of snow and rainfall on microwaves,
Holt et al. [117,118] suggested that dual-frequency CMLs could be used to distinguish
between rainfall, snow and wet snow. Subsequently, Cherkassky et al. employed the
attenuation dynamics from CMLs as a discriminant feature, and successively proposed
Fisher-based linear [63] and kernel discriminant [56] methods to distinguish between
rainfall and sleet. With the emergence of deep learning methods, Pu et al. [119] reported the
success of utilizing the extreme learning machine algorithm to construct the hydrometeor
identification model. The results show that the model performance improves as the input
features and the overall frequency or frequency difference (in the case of dual- and tri-
Remote Sens. 2023, 15, 4821 11 of 30

frequency) increase. The algorithm for classifying rainfall types can be found in [120],
where the authors implemented the distinction between convective and stratiform rainfall
by constructing deep learning models based on the differential attenuation rates of multi-
frequency dual-polarization CMLs. Moreover, Ostrometzky et al. [121] derived total mixed
cumulative precipitation containing rain, snow and sleet using at least three CMLs on the
same path, and the results were in fair agreement with the rain gauge.

3.1.4. Monitoring Phenomena Related to Air Refractivity

Since local temperature and humidity variations due to turbulent eddies lead to fluc-
tuations in air refractivity, which cause the microwave signal of CMLs to scintillate, the
sensible and latent heat fluxes associated with the air refractivity can be estimated by CML
signals. On the basis of this principle, Leijnse et al. [122] proposed a method for estimating
the sensible and latent heat fluxes and, hence, the areal evaporation using CMLs with
consideration of the surface energy budget constraints. In addition, since temperature
inversions, which are the main cause of poor air quality, lead to multipath and ducting
phenomena in electromagnetic waves, thereby relatively amplifying or attenuating RSLs,
David et al. [123] utilized CMLs to detect temperature inversions and, thus, air pollution.
Similarly, the literature [124] measured wildfire smoke particulate matter concentrations us-
ing CMLs and found a power–law relationship between RSL fluctuations and PM10/PM2.5
(particulate matter concentration less than 2.5/10 µm). In addition, given the relationship
between pollutant washout and rainfall, CMLs have the potential to point out areas with
improved air quality [125].

3.1.5. Dynamics of Rainfall and Wind

Based on a dense CML network, the spatial distribution of rainfall with high spatial
and temporal resolution can be theoretically reconstructed [126,127]. According to the
analysis of the spatiotemporal evolution of the rainfall field, the dynamics of precipitation,
and thereby the dynamics of wind, can be retrieved [128]. Using a stochastic space-time
model based on a rainfall advection and a nonlinear extended Kalman filter, Zinevich
et al. [129] attempted to obtain rainfall dynamics information from CML observations.
Subsequently, the wind dynamics can be obtained by calculating the speed and direction of
rain cloud movement.

3.2. Hydrological Application

3.2.1. Cooperation with Dedicated Rain Sensors
As an additional source of precipitation information, rainfall estimates from CMLs can
supplement or cooperate with dedicated rain sensors. Bianchi et al. [130] utilized CMLs for
quality control of rain gauges and detected the occurrence error and quantification error
separately. In contrast, Fencl et al. [131] proposed a method for adjusting rainfall estimates
from CMLs using rain gauges, demonstrating that even distant rain gauges can reduce bias.
Rain gauges are also most commonly used to reconstruct rainfall fields in conjunction with
CMLs [85,92,93].
Due to uncertainties such as Z–R relationships, ground clutter and microwave attenua-
tion, Radar QPE requires near-surface rainfall information for improvement.
Krämer et al. [132] first suggested that microwave links could be used to improve rainfall
estimates from X-band radars. In their procedure, microwave link measurements were used
on the one hand for radar attenuation correction and on the other hand to calibrate the Z–R
relationship. Shortly after, Rahimi et al. [133] proposed a backward iterative algorithm for
the attenuation calibration of X-band radars via attenuation measurements of microwave
links. The results show that the method is effective in recovering the reflectivity informa-
tion, especially under heavy rainfall conditions. More studies focused on radar attenuation
correction using CMLs can be found in [134–137]. In addition, Cummings et al. [138]
proposed a mean-field bias adjustment method for a radar QPE based on CMLs, with
similar results to a rain gauge-based adjusted QPE. Liberman et al. [139] then fused radar
Remote Sens. 2023, 15, 4821 12 of 30

and CML rainfall observations to reconstruct accurate rainfall maps. Furthermore, CMLs
can be combined with radar to invert the vertical profile of rainfall, which is of interest in
semi-arid regions for studying the Virga phenomenon (evaporation of precipitation before
reaching the ground) and improving the accuracy of near-surface rainfall estimates [140].
For meteorological satellites, Kumah et al. [50,51] improved rain area detection and
rainfall estimation by combining signals from satellites and CMLs. In addition, they
attempted to construct a random forest model to map the satellite-retrieved cloud top
attributes to the ground rainfall by taking the rainfall estimates from CMLs as the true
values [141]. The results show that the algorithm enables rainfall inversion with high spatial
and temporal resolution. In addition, in regions where dedicated rain sensors are scarce,
CMLs may be the most promising option to validate rainfall products from satellites [142].
There are also research groups that assimilate precipitation data from CMLs and
multiple dedicated rain sensors to jointly reconstruct the rainfall field. Bianchi et al. [30]
used variational and Gauss–Newton methods to invert rainfall fields from observations
of rain gauges, radar and CMLs in Switzerland, which resulted in improvements over the
raw radar QPE. In addition, as described in Section 2.1, dedicated rain sensors can also
contribute to the dry and wet period classification of CMLs.

3.2.2. Hydrological Modeling

Accurate hydrological models, which are generally supported by rain gauge and
radar data, are essential for water resource management, disaster warning and hydrologi-
cal research. However, considering the limited spatial representativeness of rain gauges
and the coarse spatial resolution of radar, as well as their unavailability in urban and
mountainous areas, there is an urgent need for additional near-surface precipitation in-
formation for small- and medium-scale hydrological modeling in these regions. As early
as 2005, Grum et al. [143] attempted to integrate rainfall measurements from microwave
links into hydrological modeling. Fencl et al. [31] compared the urban drainage model
derived from CMLs with that of rain gauges and found that the former can significantly
improve pipe flow prediction. They also tried to input the rainfall measurements from
CMLs and rain gauges into the runoff model at the same time [144]. The results showed
that CMLs improve predictions of hydrograph dynamics compared to the model using
only rain gauge data. Subsequently, in [145], they demonstrated that the performance of
runoff prediction is related to the sensitivity of CMLs to rainfall and their location in the
catchment. Moreover, as the bias in rainfall estimates from CMLs would propagate into
hydrological models [146], they also made efforts to obtain unbiased rainfall estimates
from CMLs to optimize hydrological modeling [147,148]. In addition to modeling urban
drainage, CMLs have also been used for river runoff simulation [149–151] and disaster
warning [152–156].

4. Challenges in Rainfall Estimation by CMLs

Despite extensive research within the past two decades, the CML-based rainfall esti-
mation technique still confronts certain challenges (refer to Table 2), which will be described
in detail in the remainder of this section.

Table 2. Challenges faced by CML rainfall measurement techniques.

Challenges Highlights

1. Sampling strategy: usually low sampling frequency [70], limited quantization level [64] and
recording only extreme values [157].
Data Acquisition 2. Variation of TSL during rainfall due to ATPC [158].
3. Difficulty in sharing data [42].
4. Trend of fiber optics replacing CMLs.
Remote Sens. 2023, 15, 4821 13 of 30

Table 2. Cont.

Challenges Highlights

1. Dry and wet period classification methods can still produce misclassification due to the effects of coarse
quantization, the multipath effect, wet antenna effect, etc.
2. Collecting the calibrated training set required for dry and wet period classification methods is time
Baseline estimates consuming due to the uneven rainfall distribution and unbalanced datasets may lead to model overfitting
or performance degradation.
3. Limited by the sampling strategy and quantization resolution of the CML data, researchers have to ignore,
to varying degrees, changes in the baseline during wet periods [138].

1. The characteristics of WAA are highly dependent on the antenna properties of CMLs and existing empirical
models may be less portable for CMLs with different characteristics [159].
WAA Quantification 2. Due to the uncertainty in the baseline estimation, the WAA model may no longer simply compensate for
WAA but include corrections for WAA and other unknown sources of bias.
3. The properties of WAA induced by fog and dew have not been studied specifically.

1. Nonlinearity of the γ-R relationship leads to systematic bias between rainfall estimates and path-averaged
γ–R Relationship rain rates [160].
2. Dependence of the γ-R relationship on DSD leads to reduced applicability of the power–law approximation
to the γ-R relationship [18].

1. Most studies directly treat CML-based rainfall estimates as the rain rate at the midpoint location of the path,
ignoring the variability of rainfall on the CML path [45,126,127].
Reconstruction of the Rainfall 2. Limitations in the mapping methodology would lead to errors in the rainfall maps.
Spatial Distribution 3. The unique topology of the CML networks with uneven distribution densities presents challenges for the
accurate mapping of rainfall [161].

4.1. Data Acquisition

In general, CML data derives from the mobile network operator’s Network Man-
agement System (NMS), which typically records maximum and minimum TSLs and
RSLs at a 15 min time resolution. Although NMS can work at higher frequencies, for
the purpose of checking the quality of communications, a time step of 15 min is satis-
factory for mobile network operators. However, for rainfall monitoring, such a coarse
sampling frequency may miss important information given the high temporal variability
of rainfall. In addition, the sampling strategy of recording only extreme values poses
difficulties in deriving the average rain rate over a 15 min period [157]. One solution is
to calculate the maximum and minimum rain rates using maximum and minimum atten-
uation, respectively, to obtain an unbiased estimate of the mean rain rate according to the
local rain rate probability function [10]. Another common approach treats a simple weighted
average of the maximum and minimum rain rates as the average rain rate [49]. The litera-
ture [162] provides an introduction and comparison of three methods for estimating parameters
from extreme values. Moreover, deep learning methods may also be an alternative [163,164].
Leijnse et al. [70] compared three sampling strategies for CML data and found that the per-
formance of rainfall estimation was, in descending order, continuous measurements, 15 min
averages and 15 min instantaneous values. Pudashine et al. [165] further compared the sam-
pling strategy of 15 min averages with 15 min maximum/minimum, demonstrating the
slight advantage of the latter. In the Netherlands, rainfall estimation experiments using
CMLs demonstrated that 15 min maximum/minimum sampling is superior to instanta-
neous sampling at the same time step because the former contains information over the
entire time interval [166]. In addition, NMS records RSL values with a resolution of typi-
cally 0.1, 0.3 or even 1 dB. As shown in Figure 5, the coarse quantization resolution limits
the precision of the CMLs in estimating the rain rate [64,167]. Although this phenomenon
can be mitigated with an increasing frequency and path length, it introduces other prob-
lems such as high energy consumption for high-frequency signals and rainfall variability
over long paths. Moreover, coarse quantization also limits the analysis of the pattern of
signal variation.
 introduce additional errors, especially under low-temporal-resolution sampling condi-
tions or with only RSL data available [158].
Currently, only a few research groups have shared their CML datasets [168–170],
which may be related to the commercial confidentiality of mobile network operators.
However, open access to the data may bring more insights.
Remote Sens. 2023, 15, 4821 14 of 30
Finally, in some developed countries, operators are planning to replace CMLs with
fiber optic communications, which undoubtedly hurts the availability of CML data.

Figure 5. Minimum detectable rain rate of CMLs at different quantization resolutions, path lengths
Figure 5. Minimum detectable rain rate of CMLs at different quantization resolutions, path lengths
and frequencies. Notably, the γ-R relation is referenced from the ITU-R model and the minimum
and frequencies. Notably, the γ-R relation is referenced from the ITU-R model and the minimum
detectable rain rate for most short CMLs below 10 GHz exceeds the upper limit of the color bar.
detectable rain rate for most short CMLs below 10 GHz exceeds the upper limit of the color bar.
4.2. Baseline Estimates
To ensure communication quality during rainfall, some CMLs are configured with
The estimation
automatic transmit of the baseline
power control is of great
(ATPC) toimportance
minimize RSL in the operationalHowever,
fluctuations. flow of rainfall
it can
inversion by CMLs as it determines whether non-rain-induced
introduce additional errors, especially under low-temporal-resolution sampling attenuation canconditions
be accu-
rately
or with eliminated. As for
only RSL data baseline[158].
available estimation approaches that require dry and wet period
classification,
Currently, though
only a several methods
few research based
groups haveonshared
differenttheirprinciples have[168–170],
CML datasets been proposed
which
for
may thebeclassification
related to theofcommercial
dry and wetconfidentiality
periods, thereof remain
mobiledifficulties in accurately
network operators. deter-
However,
mining whether
open access rainfall
to the data mayexists along
bring the insights.
more path of CMLs at the current time. Since we only
acquired RSLin
Finally, data (and
some in some cases
developed TSL asoperators
countries, well), it isare
difficult to determine
planning to replacewhat
CMLs factors
with
are responsible
fiber for the attenuation
optic communications, whichvariations
undoubtedly produced
hurts thein the paths of of
availability theCML
CMLs. Scintil-
data.
lation effects and multipath effects due to, for example, changes in the refractive index of
4.2. may
air, Baseline
alsoEstimates
lead to anomalous fluctuations in signal attenuation during dry periods,
whichThe may be incorrectly
estimation of thejudged
baselineasiswet periods.
of great In addition,
importance water
in the films that
operational accumulate
flow of rainfall
on the antenna
inversion by CMLsdue as
to itdew or after whether
determines rainfall may produce falseattenuation
non-rain-induced positives. Coarse RSL
can be accu-
rately eliminated. As for baseline estimation approaches that require dry and wet period
classification, though several methods based on different principles have been proposed for
the classification of dry and wet periods, there remain difficulties in accurately determining
whether rainfall exists along the path of CMLs at the current time. Since we only acquired
RSL data (and in some cases TSL as well), it is difficult to determine what factors are
responsible for the attenuation variations produced in the paths of the CMLs. Scintillation
effects and multipath effects due to, for example, changes in the refractive index of air,
may also lead to anomalous fluctuations in signal attenuation during dry periods, which
may be incorrectly judged as wet periods. In addition, water films that accumulate on the
antenna due to dew or after rainfall may produce false positives. Coarse RSL quantization
also limits the ability of CMLs to detect light rain, especially for low-frequency short CMLs.
These undoubtedly pose a negative impact on classification accuracy.
Moreover, for conventional empirical threshold-based classification methods, a priori
information is required to make a comprehensive calibration of thresholds in order to obtain
comparatively high dry and wet period detection capabilities simultaneously. Machine
learning methods typically have a higher classification accuracy but require large, labeled
datasets for training. However, on the one hand, it is not always the case that dedicated
rain sensors exist in the vicinity of CMLs to provide rainfall data; on the other hand, due
to the inhomogeneity of the rainfall distribution, the dataset is usually unbalanced (much
fewer data in the wet period than in the dry period), which not only implies that it takes
more time to collect enough wet period data, but also leads to the requirement of balancing
the training set using undersampling or oversampling methods, which may contribute to
overfitting or poorer performance of the model.
After dry and wet period classifications, the baseline will be determined by the dry
period attenuation over a period of time around the rainfall event. In contrast, methods to
estimate the baseline without dry and wet period information usually dynamically update
the statistical values of attenuation in past time periods as the baseline. This may be a
Remote Sens. 2023, 15, 4821 15 of 30

reasonable reference as the historical information on attenuation is able to reflect the classic
state of CMLs working in the dry period. The problem is the fact that the baseline for the
wet period will not remain constant but will vary with some regularity, and could possibly
be quite different from the past dry period attenuation due to phenomena caused by rainfall
such as increased water vapor, decreased temperatures, changes in the device conditions,
etc. However, subject to the coarse sampling and quantization resolution of the RSL, most
researchers have to ignore, to varying degrees, changes in the baseline during wet periods.

4.3. WAA Quantification

After the estimation of the baseline, another important source of error is the quan-
tification of WAA. Undercompensation of WAA can lead to a systematic overestimation
of rainfall. This phenomenon is especially exacerbated by higher WAA relative to rain-
induced attenuation under short CML and light rain. Although a variety of empirical
or semi-empirical WAA models have been developed, most of these studies have been
derived from a few CMLs with limited frequency. In fact, WAA is highly correlated with
the attributes of CML antennas, leading to the possibility that the properties of WAA found
from different CMLs may be completely different: Schleiss et al. [29] reported antenna
wetting times of up to 36 min, but other studies [46,73] have found wetting dynamics to be
negligible. Additionally, contrary to common sense, hydrophobic antennas tend to form
water beads on the antenna surface, which are more resistant to evaporation than the water
film formed by hydrophilic antennas, prolonging the duration of the WAA’s impact after
rainfall events end [159]. Therefore, the existing empirical WAA models may not be as
portable for CMLs with different characteristics.
Another source of error is the way that WAA is calculated. In general, WAA values are
obtained by measured attenuation minus the baseline and rain-induced attenuation, which
is converted from rain rates measured by rain sensors near CMLs. However, as mentioned
in Section 4.2, there is uncertainty in the estimation of the baseline, in which case the model
may no longer simply compensate for WAA but include corrections for WAA and other
unknown sources of bias. Furthermore, the number of antennas wetted during rainfall is also
an important unknown factor, especially in the case of long CMLs and small-area rainfall.
Finally, in addition to rainfall, phenomena such as dew and fog may likewise wet
the radome and produce WAA, which needs to be filtered out [126]. However, dew- and
fog-induced WAA has still not been specifically studied for the properties of its dynamics
and magnitude.

4.4. γ–R Relationship

As shown in Equations (6) and (7), accurate rainfall inversion can only be guaranteed if
the γ-R relationship is close to linear or if rainfall is uniform on the path of CMLs. Although
existing CMLs, most of which operate at 15 to 40 GHz, have a parameter b that can be
approximated as 1, with the growing demand for bandwidth, higher-frequency CMLs
will have to pay more attention to this problem [160], which will introduce considerable
inherent errors into the rainfall estimation. This phenomenon is mitigated in the case of
short CMLs because the variability of their path rainfall tends to be negligible.
Another source of uncertainty worth noting is the influence of DSD on the γ-R relation-
ship. For CMLs outside of about 30 GHz, the dependence of the γ-R relationship on DSD
is getting higher (Figure 4), i.e., the agreement between the scatter corresponding to γ-R
and the fitted curve decreases, resulting in lower accuracy in rainfall estimation [18]. It has
been shown that long-range spatial averaging of DSDs over the paths of CMLs can reduce
rainfall estimation errors because the γ-R relationship over the paths becomes closer to the
fitted power law as the path length increases [171,172]. In addition, considering different
DSDs for stratiform and convective rainfall, the accuracy of rainfall inversion of the γ-R
relationship for different rainfall types was analyzed by Pu et al. [160]. The results show
that stratiform rainfall always exhibits a negative bias above 10 GHz, whereas convective
rainfall exhibits a negative and positive bias below and above 50 GHz, respectively. Fitting
Remote Sens. 2023, 15, 4821 16 of 30

power law relationships to different types of rainfall separately can provide more accurate
rainfall estimates [47,84], but it requires additional information about the rainfall type.

4.5. Reconstruction of the Rainfall Spatial Distribution

In reconstructing the continuous spatial distribution of rainfall using sparse rainfall es-
timates from CMLs, uncertainties are inevitable. Although Gaona et al. [173] demonstrated
that. In the Netherlands. the error in estimating rainfall by CMLs was greater compared to
rainfall mapping, rainfall mapping is likely to be more critical over a larger area. The main
sources of uncertainty in rainfall mapping include the representation of path-averaged
rainfall estimates, systematic errors in mapping methods, and the density and distribution
of CMLs. Firstly, the majority of studies simply treat the path-averaged rainfall estimates
for CMLs as the rain rate at the midpoint of their path [45,126,127], which is feasible for
short CMLs; but, for long CMLs, this undoubtedly ignores the spatial variability of rainfall
on the path.
Secondly, mapping methods, regardless of geostatistical interpolation algorithms,
tomographic reconstruction techniques, stochastic mixing or compressed sensing, each have
their own limitations in their principles. When applying these methods, these limitations
are, of course, reflected in the errors of the rainfall maps.
Thirdly, CMLs are not always distributed in high densities. Due to their purpose of
communication, the density of CMLs in sparsely populated areas is usually much lower
than in densely populated areas. This results in the poor ability of CMLs to capture the spa-
tial distribution of rainfall in these areas. In addition, the unique topology of CML networks
is not designed for measuring rainfall and does not facilitate rainfall mapping [161].

5. Future Work
Although CMLs, as opportunistic sensors, have the advantages of a low cost, high
spatial and temporal resolution and wide coverage over traditional rain sensors, there
is still a lot of room for improvement, as mentioned in Section 4. As shown in Table 3,
the focus of our future work may need to concentrate on the following points, which are
detailed in the remainder of this section.

Table 3. Potential future work regarding rainfall measurement techniques based on CMLs.

Future Works Highlights

1. Improve the sampling frequency and strategy for CML data [174].
Enhanced Collaboration with 2. Promote data sharing.
Mobile Network Operators 3. Obtain information other than signal strength information (e.g., phase) [100,118,175].
4. Mutual benefits for researchers and CML operators [176].

1. Improve the accuracy of dry and wet period classification.

2. Investigate baseline dynamics [177].
3. Establish WAA models that take into account the characteristics of CML.
4. Improve the accuracy of rainfall inversion by combining deep learning and
Improvement of
power–law relationship [178].
Processing Procedures
5. Develop rainfall mapping methods that consider the unique topology and
measurement characteristics of CMLs [179,180].
6. Investigate efficient and cost-effective methods for calibrating CML processing
procedures.

1. Assimilate CML data from different operators [181].

Data Assimilation
2. Assimilate rainfall observations from CML with other rain sensors [91].

Error Analysis of CMLs Applied to Study the effects of unique topographic and climatic conditions in mountainous areas on
Mountainous Areas rainfall measurement techniques for CMLs.
Remote Sens. 2023, 15, 4821 17 of 30

Table 3. Cont.

Future Works Highlights

Exploration of Other Applications of
Explore the potential of CMLs to monitor plant, animal and human activities [159,182,183].
CMLs
Rainfall Prediction Research rainfall forecasts based on CML data [184,185].
Application and Error Analysis of
Application and error analysis of rainfall inversion for high-frequency CMLs [47,186].
High-frequency CMLs
Combination with Earth–space
Reconstruct the three-dimensional spatial rainfall field using CMLs in conjunction with ESLs [187].
microwave links
Attempts to Estimate Rainfall using Attempt to establish the rainfall attenuation model of low-frequency non-line-of-sight signals between
Cellphone Signals cellphones and cell towers.

5.1. Enhanced Collaboration with Mobile Network Operators

To advance the development of rainfall estimation techniques using CMLs, in the
first place, we need to strengthen our collaboration with mobile network operators who
are the maintainers and data providers of CMLs. Firstly, although the current sampling
strategy for most CML data is not that satisfactory, it can be indeed improved. One
solution is to install data loggers on cell towers, which can sample RSLs with free temporal
resolution and accuracy [28]. However, the high expense of deploying and maintaining
data loggers for a large number of CMLs undermines their low-cost advantage. In fact,
some research groups [14,54] have already realized data acquisition with high temporal
resolution via simple network management protocol (SNMP), which is a standard network
management protocol widely used in TCP/IP networks. It is capable of supporting NMS
for monitoring CMLs connected to the cellular network. Depending on the customized
SNMP data acquisition software, RSL and TSL can be polled at a set sampling step as low
as a few seconds. Despite the fact that the data quantization is still limited by the CML
hardware, such CML data with high sampling frequencies are favorable for investigating
variation patterns of signal attenuation. And, thanks to Chwala et al. [174], the related
software has been open-sourced at GitHub. However, SNMP must be used only under the
license of the mobile network operators as it requires access to their intranet. Therefore,
trust between the research groups and the CML operators is a must.
Secondly, for commercial confidentiality reasons, mobile network operators usually
permit the use of CML data only to the relevant research group; thus, CML data are
generally not shared among different research groups. However, open access to high-
quality CML data may be able to bring more insights into the issues. Researchers need to
convince CML operators and guarantee that the data will be used without jeopardizing
their interests.
Thirdly, the CML data now used for rainfall inversion are mainly signal strength infor-
mation. In fact, many CMLs are configured with multiple sub-links due to communication
needs, which may lead to additional opportunities for identifying hydrometeors [118],
improving the accuracy of rainfall inversion [175] and humidity estimation [100] if phase
information of microwave signal is available.
Finally, it is unrealistic for mobile network operators to provide CML data at no cost
or for only researchers to pay for it. In fact, as operators provide CML data, hydrometeo-
rological researchers can utilize expertise to assist operators in the design and real-time
decision making of CML networks, as described in [176]. In addition, considering the prac-
tical value of CML rainfall measurement technology, researchers can help CML operators
to operationalize and productize it for sale to fields such as agriculture, water resource
management and meteorological research.

5.2. Improvement of Processing Procedures

Even though multiple procedures for processing CML data have been developed to date,
they still have a lot of room for improvement. For dry and wet period classification, the WAA
caused by antenna wetting by dew or fog, the WAA dynamics after rainfall and the drift of
Remote Sens. 2023, 15, 4821 18 of 30

attenuation in the dry period induced by such factors as the occlusion of metallic objects in
the path may produce false positives. In addition, due to the insensitivity of most existing
CMLs to light rain, light rain events are often missed. However, limited by the availability of
signal level data only and the similarity of the two types of phenomena, current classification
algorithms are still unable to cope with these problems effectively. In the future, based on
CML data with high temporal and quantization resolution, it may be possible to make a
breakthrough by discovering the differences between the above phenomena.
For baseline determination, the baseline should not be constant during wet periods
because of changes in the equipment conditions of the CMLs and in the environment along
their paths. Existing methods more or less ignore this. With the rise of machine learning,
time-series prediction algorithms based on recurrent neural networks, such as LSTM, may
enable the estimation of wet period baselines [177].
For WAA correction, since WAA is highly dependent on antenna properties, the find-
ings on WAA may vary from one research group to another. However, state-of-the-art
WAA modeling is still limited to a small number of CMLs, which are usually from the same
operators, and the mechanism of action between WAA and antenna properties remains un-
systematically investigated. Although these models have been validated on large datasets,
the errors may be masked in large-scale comparisons. In the future, investigating the effect
of different antenna characteristic parameters on the WAA model by controlling variables
may be a solution to achieve a more robust WAA quantization.
For rainfall inversion using the γ-R relationship, the power–law approximation in-
troduces inherent errors due to the nonlinearity of the curve and the dependence on DSD.
One possible solution is to utilize deep learning to substitute the γ-R relationship [188–191].
Habi et al. [178] have compared data-driven Recurrent Neural Network (RNN) algorithms
with traditional power–law relations. The results show that the former has better perfor-
mance but poorer robustness. Adding a temporal normalization layer can improve the
robustness of the RNN algorithm, but at the same time compromise performance. In the
future, perhaps an attempt can be made to combine deep learning with power–law relations
to ensure excellent performance and robustness at the same time.
For rainfall mapping, most studies still use CML-based rainfall estimates as the rain
rate at the midpoint of the path. This not only fails to take into account the spatial vari-
ability of rainfall on the path, but also ignores the advantage of CMLs in providing linear-
integrated measurements. In addition, most rainfall mapping techniques directly follow
the rainfall mapping methods of dedicated rain sensor networks. Future work could fo-
cus on improving rainfall mapping techniques by considering the unique topology and
measurement characteristics of CMLs [179,180].
In addition, since the proposed CML processing procedures are usually applicable
to different regions, open-source algorithms are not directly usable. While dedicated
rainfall observations can be used to calibrate the algorithms to specific climates and CML
networks [192], calibrating algorithms using only CML data remains a challenge in regions
where rain sensors are not already available. Investigating low-cost but efficient calibration
methods in these regions (such as utilizing other opportunistic rain sensors) may be a
future direction of research.

5.3. Data Assimilation

One advantage of the use of CMLs for rainfall estimation is the availability of a
sufficient network of virtual sensors; however, it is common that there may be more than
one mobile network operator in a region. This means that their data need to be assimilated
with each other because the sampling strategy and data format are quite likely to be
different for different operators. Blettner et al. [181] recently reported the case of using
CMLs from Germany and the Czech Republic to generate transboundary rainfall maps
and found different anomalous behavior for heterogeneous datasets, emphasizing the
importance of quality control algorithms. In addition, the situation is potentially improved
in the future if access to the operator’s NMS is available as in Section 5.1.
Remote Sens. 2023, 15, 4821 19 of 30

In addition, in areas where dedicated precipitation observations exist, excessive focus should
not be placed on discussing CML-only-based rainfall estimates. It may be more meaningful
to assimilate CMLs with traditional rain sensors or even other opportunistic sensors [91] to
complement the spatiotemporal resolution and accuracy of precipitation products.

5.4. Error Analysis of CMLs Applied to Mountainous Areas

A strength of the CML rainfall measurement technique, which has been widely men-
tioned in many literatures [41–43], is that it is available in mountainous areas where the
deployment of radar and rain gauges is difficult. However, due to the unique topographic
and climatic conditions of mountainous areas, the CML rainfall measurement technique
may need to be adapted. First, the elevation angles of CMLs in mountainous areas are no
longer negligible and can even reach tens of degrees [193]. Therefore, the calculation of the
raindrop extinction cross-section needs to take into account the tilt angle of the raindrop
with respect to microwave propagation, but little attention has been paid to this in the
calibration of the γ-R relationship [28]. Second, the rainfall distribution on the inclined path
is more heterogeneous because the variation of rainfall in the vertical direction needs to be
considered in addition to the horizontal direction [194,195]. In order to validate that CMLs
can substitute radar and rain gauges in mountainous areas and to promote the application
of this technology, a systematic analysis of their performance on inclined paths must be
performed based on experiments or simulations in the future.

5.5. Exploration of Other Applications of CMLs

In operation, CMLs are not only affected by the atmospheric environment but may
also suffer from plant, animal and human activities. Moshe et al. [182] reported that the
presence of birds along the path of CMLs causes additional attenuation and suggested the
use of CMLs to monitor migratory birds. And, Hunt et al. [183] discovered that a cellular
network signal strength of 2.4 GHz is related to the presence of vegetation in the path, and,
if present, as well as to the water content of the vegetation and the distance the signal passes
through the vegetation. Thus, the links between CMLs and arbitrary microwave receivers
can be used to estimate vegetation characteristics. Furthermore, in [159], artificially caused
occlusion of objects in the path was found to lead to a drift in the attenuation of the CMLs.
It would be interesting to monitor these phenomena using CMLs. The variation character
of the attenuation due to these phenomena could be studied in the future to enable the
identification and observation of these phenomena.

5.6. Rainfall Prediction

After rainfall mapping, rainfall paths and intensities can be forecasted in the short
term based on the variation of the spatial distribution of rainfall over time. Commonly,
such short-term forecasts are supported by radar data. However, in economically backward
developing countries or in areas unavailable to radar, rainfall maps based on CMLs may be
an alternate option [196]. Imhoff et al. [185] constructed nowcasts for the first time in the
Netherlands using country-wide rainfall maps based on CMLs and found that CMLs gave
better results than radar in general. Recently, Zhang et al. [184] also carried out rainfall
field nowcasting experiments based on CMLs in Jiangyin City, China, and found that
the LSTM-based nowcasting algorithm has better performance for stratiform and mixed
precipitation compared to convective precipitation. In addition, based on the assumption
that atmospheric variables related to rainfall change prior to a rainfall event affect CMLs,
CMLs can also directly predict whether and how much rain will fall in the future without
the need for rainfall mapping [197]. Further research on techniques for predicting rainfall
using CMLs could be useful for disaster prevention and control, especially in poor tropical
regions where extreme events are common.
Remote Sens. 2023, 15, 4821 20 of 30

5.7. Application and Error Analysis of High-frequency CMLs

With fifth-generation (5G) and even sixth-generation (6G) wireless systems in opera-
tion, huge data throughput is forcing operators to design E-band CMLs at 71 to 86 GHz and
replace older equipment. This may lead to new opportunities because these high-frequency
CMLs are more sensitive to light rain and water vapor [47,198,199]. However, the increase
in frequency also leads to nonlinearities in the γ-R relationship and increased dependence
on DSD. In addition, high-frequency CMLs also suffer from more energy loss and, there-
fore, the path length is correspondingly shorter, which may lead to a more severe negative
impact of WAA [186]. An error analysis of high-frequency CMLs could contribute to their
future application in environmental monitoring.

5.8. Combination with Earth–Space Microwave Links

Similar to CMLs, microwave radiation from Earth–space links (ESLs), which connect
satellites and ground receivers, will also be attenuated by rainfall [177,200,201]. Importantly,
in contrast to CMLs, the downlink signal of ESLs can tilt through the rain area to obtain
vertical information on precipitation [202–204]. Furthermore, with the development of
satellite communications, a large number of satellites are expected to be launched in the
near future [205]. Therefore, fusing opportunistic rainfall information from ESLs may be
a topic for improving and expanding rainfall estimation based on CMLs [187,206,207].
However, most of the existing studies are still limited to examining rainfall measurement
techniques based on CMLs and ESLs separately, and works on combining CMLs and ESLs
have not yet been emphasized [208]. Future work could attempt the joint reconstruction of
three-dimensional spatial rainfall fields using both ESLs and CMLs.

5.9. Attempts to Estimate Rainfall Using Cellphone Signals

As fiber optic communications are increasingly used in cellular communication net-
works, CMLs will become less available in certain areas. In this case, the large number of
links between user terminals and cell towers (base stations) may be an alternative. These
non-line-of-sight links typically operate at frequencies below 6 GHz and are, thus, the-
oretically insensitive to rainfall in the propagation path [209]. However, during rainfall,
the wetting effect of obstacles in the path [210,211], reflective surfaces (walls, grounds,
etc.) [212–214] and the transmitting antenna [215,216] may significantly affect the signal
quality. Beritelli et al. [217] constructed a probabilistic neural network to distinguish rainfall
classes using statistical features of 4G/Long Term Evolution (LTE) signals and achieved a
classification accuracy of 96.7%. Subsequently, Song et al. [218] built a 2 GHz experimental
link and used the C4.5 algorithm to implement the classification of dry and wet periods
based on cellphone signals. In order to estimate the distance using low-frequency radio
signals, Fang et al. [219] developed a path loss model considering rainfall attenuation
effects, which achieved a satisfactory performance. Therefore, with distances between
the receiving terminal and the cell tower known, the model should be able to provide
accurate rainfall estimation. Recently, the literature [220] also reported cases of estimating
rainfall using cellphone signals based on deep learning algorithms. Although preliminary
studies on the use of cellphone signals to monitor rainfall have been conducted, the law
of rainfall-induced comprehensive effects on signal propagation is still unclear and the
generalization ability of the models proposed in the above studies is yet to be verified.
Therefore, future explorations can attempt to model low-frequency non-line-of-sight signal
transmissions to address the limitations in current studies of rainfall measurement by
cellphone signals, especially in regions where the number of CMLs is decreasing.

6. Conclusions and Outlook

In this article, we provide a systematic overview of rainfall measurement techniques
based on CMLs and summarize current challenges and possible future research directions.
Compared to dedicated rain sensors, CMLs can economically provide near-surface pre-
cipitation information with a high spatial and temporal resolution and wide coverage,
Remote Sens. 2023, 15, 4821 21 of 30

which can effectively complement dedicated precipitation observations. Within the past
20 years, scholars have comprehensively studied the processing flow of CML data and
made great progress. However, the technology still faces some challenges [40,221,222].
Most importantly, breakthroughs must be made in data acquisition and CML data with
high temporal and quantization resolutions may bring new insights into dry and wet
period classification, baseline estimation and WAA correction. Encouragingly, a number
of research groups have recently openly shared their high-quality datasets [169,170,223],
making a critical contribution to the investigation of CML technology.
Another practical challenge is the gradual replacement of CMLs by fiber optic com-
munication technologies. Due to the advantages of fiber optic transmission, such as high
speed, low loss, high interference immunity and large information-carrying capacity, there
is a tendency for the proportion of fiber optics to gradually increase in cellular communi-
cation networks. However, considering the difficulty and high cost of fiber deployment,
developing countries, where CMLs have the greatest potential, will continue to rely on
CMLs for a long time to come. Moreover, low-frequency non-line-of-sight links between
cell towers and cellphone terminals have also shown potential to estimate precipitation,
which could be an alternative in areas where the number of CMLs is decreasing.
As the demand for bandwidth continues to increase, the frequency of CMLs will ex-
pand towards higher frequencies in the future, which opens up the possibility of monitoring
water vapor and improving the accuracy of light rain inversion. However, a systematic error
analysis of rainfall inversion with high-frequency CMLs, especially for the γ-R relationship,
is needed before application.
An additional issue that has not been widely investigated but is highly desirable is the
productization and commercialization of rainfall estimates based on CMLs. While many
studies have demonstrated that CMLs can provide reliable rainfall estimates or improve
dedicated precipitation products, only a few operational precipitation products from CMLs
have been reported so far [196]. On the one hand, rainfall inversion algorithms based on
CMLs still face some challenges, as described in Section 4. On the other hand, and more
importantly, in order to provide 24/7 real-time rainfall products, operators need to ensure
reliable real-time availability of CML data, which entails additional costs and potential
commercial confidentiality issues. Achieving this goal may be able to enhance collaboration
between researchers and mobile network operators.
To conclude, we hope that our analysis and comments on the technique will help
researchers recognize the current challenges and conduct further research.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, P.Z. and X.L.; methodology, P.Z. and X.L.; validation, P.Z. and
K.P.; formal analysis, P.Z. and K.P.; investigation, P.Z. and K.P.; resources, X.L.; writing—original draft
preparation, P.Z.; writing—review and editing, X.L. and K.P.; visualization, P.Z. and K.P.; supervision, X.L.;
project administration, X.L.; funding acquisition, X.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published
version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant
No. 42222505) and the Excellent Youth Scholars of Natural Science Foundation of Hunan Province of
China (Grant No. 2021JJ20046).
Acknowledgments: The authors thank the editor and anonymous reviewers for providing helpful
advice.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Getirana, A.; Kirschbaum, D.; Mandarino, F.; Ottoni, M.; Khan, S.; Arsenault, K. Potential of GPM IMERG Precipitation Estimates
to Monitor Natural Disaster Triggers in Urban Areas: The Case of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Remote Sens. 2020, 12, 4095. [CrossRef]
2. Berg, P.; Moseley, C.; Haerter, J.O. Strong increase in convective precipitation in response to higher temperatures. Nat. Geosci.
2013, 6, 181–185. [CrossRef]
3. Nešpor, V.; Sevruk, B. Estimation of Wind-Induced Error of Rainfall Gauge Measurements Using a Numerical Simulation.
J. Atmos. Ocean. Technol. 1999, 16, 450. [CrossRef]
Remote Sens. 2023, 15, 4821 22 of 30

4. Ulbrich, C.W.; Lee, L.G. Rainfall Measurement Error by WSR-88D Radars due to Variations in Z–R Law Parameters and the Radar
Constant. J. Atmos. Ocean. Technol. 1999, 16, 1017–1024. [CrossRef]
5. Nikahd, A.; Hashim, M.; Nazemosadat, M.J. A Review of Uncertainty Sources on Weather Ground-Based Radar for Rainfall
Estimation. Appl. Mech. Mater. 2016, 818, 254–271. [CrossRef]
6. Hou, A.Y.; Kakar, R.K.; Neeck, S.; Azarbarzin, A.A.; Kummerow, C.D.; Kojima, M.; Oki, R.; Nakamura, K.; Iguchi, T. The Global
Precipitation Measurement Mission. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 2014, 95, 701–722. [CrossRef]
7. Meyer, H.; Kühnlein, M.; Appelhans, T.; Nauss, T. Comparison of four machine learning algorithms for their applicability in
satellite-based optical rainfall retrievals. Atmos. Res. 2016, 169, 424–433. [CrossRef]
8. Chen, R.; Bennartz, R. Rainfall Algorithms Using Oceanic Satellite Observations from MWHS-2. Adv. Atmos. Sci. 2021,
38, 1367–1378. [CrossRef]
9. Stephens, C.M.; Pham, H.T.; Marshall, L.A.; Johnson, F.M. Which Rainfall Errors Can Hydrologic Models Handle? Implications
for Using Satellite-Derived Products in Sparsely Gauged Catchments. Water Resour. Res. 2022, 58, e2020WR02933. [CrossRef]
10. Messer, H.; Zinevich, A.; Alpert, P. Environmental monitoring by wireless communication networks. Science 2006, 312, 713.
[CrossRef]
11. de Vos, L.; Leijnse, H.; Overeem, A.; Uijlenhoet, R. The potential of urban rainfall monitoring with crowdsourced automatic
weather stations in Amsterdam. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2017, 21, 765–777. [CrossRef]
12. Rabiei, E.; Haberlandt, U.; Sester, M.; Fitzner, D. Rainfall estimation using moving cars as rain gauges—Laboratory experiments.
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2013, 17, 4701–4712. [CrossRef]
13. Jiang, S.; Babovic, V.; Zheng, Y.; Xiong, J. Advancing Opportunistic Sensing in Hydrology: A Novel Approach to Measuring
Rainfall with Ordinary Surveillance Cameras. Water Resour. Res. 2019, 55, 3004–3027. [CrossRef]
14. Fencl, M.; Rieckermann, J.; Sykora, P.; Stransky, D.; Bares, V. Commercial microwave links instead of rain gauges: Fiction or
reality? Water Sci. Technol. 2015, 71, 31–37. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
15. Gosset, M.; Kunstmann, H.; Zougmore, F.; Cazenave, F.; Leijnse, H.; Uijlenhoet, R.; Chwala, C.; Keis, F.; Doumounia, A.; Boubacar,
B.; et al. Improving Rainfall Measurement in Gauge Poor Regions Thanks to Mobile Telecommunication Networks. Bull. Am.
Meteorol. Soc. 2016, 97, 49–51. [CrossRef]
16. de Vos, L.W.; Droste, A.M.; Zander, M.J.; Overeem, A.; Leijnse, H.; Heusinkveld, B.G.; Steeneveld, G.J.; Uijlenhoet, R. Hydromete-
orological Monitoring Using Opportunistic Sensing Networks in the Amsterdam Metropolitan Area. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc.
2020, 101, 167–185. [CrossRef]
17. Olsen, R.; Rogers, D.; Hodge, D. The aR b relation in the calculation of rain attenuation. IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag. 1978,
26, 318–329. [CrossRef]
18. Atlas, D.; Ulbrich, C.W. Path- and Area-Integrated Rainfall Measurement by Microwave Attenuation in the 1–3 cm Band. J. Appl.
Meteorol. Climatol. 1977, 16, 1322–1331. [CrossRef]
19. Jameson, A.R. A Comparison of Microwave Techniques for Measuring Rainfall. J. Appl. Meteorol. Climatol. 1991, 30, 32–54.
[CrossRef]
20. Rincon, R.F.; Lang, R.H.; Thiele, O. Rain estimation using the NASA/TRMM microwave link. In Proceedings of the IEEE 1999
International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium, IGARSS’99, Hamburg, Germany, 28 June–2 July 1999; pp. 2063–2065.
21. Rincon, R.F.; Lang, R.H. Microwave link dual-wavelength measurements of path-average attenuation for the estimation of drop
size distributions and rainfall. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 2002, 40, 760–770. [CrossRef]
22. Holt, A.R.; Goddard, J.W.F.; Upton, G.; Willis, M.J.; Rahimi, A.R.; Baxter, P.D.; Collier, C. Measurement of rainfall by dual-
wavelength microwave attenuation. Electron. Lett. 2001, 36, 2099–2101. [CrossRef]
23. Rahimi, A.R.; Holt, A.R.; Upton, G.J.G.; Cummings, R.J. Use of dual-frequency microwave links for measuring path-averaged
rainfall. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 2003, 108, 4467. [CrossRef]
24. Rahimi, A.R.; Upton, G.J.G.; Holt, A.R. Dual-frequency links—A complement to gauges and radar for the measurement of rain.
J. Hydrol. 2004, 288, 3–12. [CrossRef]
25. Chen, B.; Yang, J.; Pu, J. Statistical Characteristics of Raindrop Size Distribution in the Meiyu Season Observed in Eastern China.
J. Meteorol. Soc. Japan. Ser. II 2013, 91, 215–227. [CrossRef]
26. Leijnse, H.; Uijlenhoet, R.; Stricker, J.N.M. Rainfall measurement using radio links from cellular communication networks. Water
Resour. Res. 2007, 43, W03201. [CrossRef]
27. Schleiss, M.; Berne, A. Identification of Dry and Rainy Periods Using Telecommunication Microwave Links. IEEE Geosci. Remote
Sens. Lett. 2010, 7, 611–615. [CrossRef]
28. Chwala, C.; Gmeiner, A.; Qiu, W.; Hipp, S.; Nienaber, D.; Siart, U.; Eibert, T.; Pohl, M.; Seltmann, J.; Fritz, J.; et al. Precipitation
observation using microwave backhaul links in the alpine and pre-alpine region of Southern Germany. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.
2012, 16, 2647–2661. [CrossRef]
29. Schleiss, M.; Rieckermann, J.; Berne, A. Quantification and Modeling of Wet-Antenna Attenuation for Commercial Microwave
Links. IEEE Geosci. Remote Sens. Lett. 2013, 10, 1195–1199. [CrossRef]
30. Bianchi, B.; Jan van Leeuwen, P.; Hogan, R.J.; Berne, A. A Variational Approach to Retrieve Rain Rate by Combining Information
from Rain Gauges, Radars, and Microwave Links. J. Hydrometeorol. 2013, 14, 1897–1909. [CrossRef]
31. Fencl, M.; Rieckermann, J.; Schleiss, M.; Stránský, D.; Bareš, V. Assessing the potential of using telecommunication microwave
links in urban drainage modelling. Water Sci. Technol. 2013, 68, 1810–1818. [CrossRef]
Remote Sens. 2023, 15, 4821 23 of 30

32. D’Amico, M.; Manzoni, A.; Solazzi, G.L. Use of Operational Microwave Link Measurements for the Tomographic Reconstruction
of 2-D Maps of Accumulated Rainfall. IEEE Geosci. Remote Sens. Lett. 2016, 13, 1827–1831. [CrossRef]
33. Rios Gaona, M.F.; Overeem, A.; Raupach, T.H.; Leijnse, H.; Uijlenhoet, R. Rainfall retrieval with commercial microwave links in
São Paulo, Brazil. Atmos. Meas. Techn. 2018, 11, 4465–4476. [CrossRef]
34. Song, K.; Liu, X.; Gao, T. Real-Time Rainfall Estimation Using Microwave Links: A Case Study in East China during the Plum
Rain Season in 2020. Sensors 2021, 21, 858. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
35. Liu, X.; Zhao, K.; Zou, M.; Pu, K.; Song, K. Rainfall Monitoring Using a Microwave Links Network: A Long-Term Experiment in
East China. Adv. Atmos. Sci. 2023, 40, 1567–1583. [CrossRef]
36. Overeem, A.; Leijnse, H.; van Leth, T.C.; Bogerd, L.; Priebe, J.; Tricarico, D.; Droste, A.; Uijlenhoet, R. Tropical rainfall monitoring
with commercial microwave links in Sri Lanka. Environ. Res. Lett. 2021, 16, 074058. [CrossRef]
37. Turko, M.; Gosset, M.; Kacou, M.; Bouvier, C.; Chahinian, N.; Boone, A.; Alcoba, M. Rainfall Measurement from Commercial
Microwave Links for Urban Hydrology in Africa: A Simulation Framework for Sensitivity Analysis. J. Hydrometeorol. 2021,
22, 1819–1834. [CrossRef]
38. David, N.; Liu, Y.; Kumah, K.K.; Hoedjes, J.C.B.; Su, B.Z.; Gao, H.O. On the Power of Microwave Communication Data to Monitor
Rain for Agricultural Needs in Africa. Water 2021, 13, 730. [CrossRef]
39. Doumounia, A.; Gosset, M.; Cazenave, F.; Kacou, M.; François, Z. Rainfall Monitoring based on Microwave links from cellular
telecommunication Networks: First Results from a West African Test Bed. Geophys. Res. Lett. 2014, 41, 6016–6022. [CrossRef]
40. Messer, H.; Sendik, O. A New Approach to Precipitation Monitoring: A critical survey of existing technologies and challenges.
IEEE Signal Process. Mag. 2015, 32, 110–122. [CrossRef]
41. Uijlenhoet, R.; Overeem, A.; Leijnse, H. Opportunistic remote sensing of rainfall using microwave links from cellular communica-
tion networks. WIREs Water 2018, 5, e1289. [CrossRef]
42. Chwala, C.; Kunstmann, H. Commercial microwave link networks for rainfall observation: Assessment of the current status and
future challenges. WIREs Water 2019, 6, e1337. [CrossRef]
43. Lian, B.; Wei, Z.; Sun, X.; Li, Z.; Zhao, J. A Review on Rainfall Measurement Based on Commercial Microwave Links in Wireless
Cellular Networks. Sensors 2022, 22, 4395. [CrossRef]
44. Leijnse, H.; Uijlenhoet, R.; Stricker, J.N.M. Hydrometeorological application of a microwave link: 2. Precipitation. Water Resour.
Res. 2007, 43, W04417. [CrossRef]
45. Overeem, A.; Leijnse, H.; Uijlenhoet, R. Retrieval algorithm for rainfall mapping from microwave links in a cellular communication
network. Atmos. Meas. Tech. 2016, 9, 2425–2444. [CrossRef]
46. Graf, M.; Chwala, C.; Polz, J.; Kunstmann, H. Rainfall estimation from a German-wide commercial microwave link network:
Optimized processing and validation for 1 year of data. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2020, 24, 2931–2950. [CrossRef]
47. Fencl, M.; Dohnal, M.; Valtr, P.; Grabner, M.; Bareš, V. Atmospheric observations with E-band microwave links—challenges and
opportunities. Atmos. Meas. Tech. 2020, 13, 6559–6578. [CrossRef]
48. Upton, G.J.G.; Holt, A.R.; Cummings, R.J.; Rahimi, A.R.; Goddard, J.W.F. Microwave links: The future for urban rainfall
measurement? Atmos. Res. 2005, 77, 300–312. [CrossRef]
49. Overeem, A.; Leijnse, H.; Uijlenhoet, R. Measuring urban rainfall using microwave links from commercial cellular communication
networks. Water Resour. Res. 2011, 47, W12505. [CrossRef]
50. Kumah, K.K.; Hoedjes, J.C.B.; David, N.; Maathuis, B.H.P.; Gao, H.O.; Su, B.Z. Combining MWL and MSG SEVIRI Satellite Signals
for Rainfall Detection and Estimation. Atmosphere 2020, 11, 884. [CrossRef]
51. Kumah, K.K.; Hoedjes, J.C.B.; David, N.; Maathuis, B.H.P.; Gao, H.O.; Su, B.Z. The MSG Technique: Improving Commercial
Microwave Link Rainfall Intensity by Using Rain Area Detection from Meteosat Second Generation. Remote Sens. 2021, 13, 3274.
[CrossRef]
52. Reller, C.; Loeliger, H.A.; Díaz, J.P.M. A model for quasi-periodic signals with application to rain estimation from microwave link
gain. In Proceedings of the 2011 19th European Signal Processing Conference, Barcelona, Spain, 29 August–2 September 2011;
pp. 971–975.
53. Rayitsfeld, A.; Samuels, R.; Zinevich, A.; Hadar, U.; Alpert, P. Comparison of two methodologies for long term rainfall monitoring
using a commercial microwave communication system. Atmos. Res. 2012, 104–105, 119–127. [CrossRef]
54. Wang, Z.; Schleiss, M.; Jaffrain, J.; Berne, A.; Rieckermann, J. Using Markov switching models to infer dry and rainy periods from
telecommunication microwave link signals. Atmos. Meas. Tech. 2012, 5, 1847–1859. [CrossRef]
55. Harel, O.; Messer, H. Extension of the MFLRT to Detect an Unknown Deterministic Signal Using Multiple Sensors, Applied for
Precipitation Detection. IEEE Signal Process. Lett. 2013, 20, 945–948. [CrossRef]
56. Cherkassky, D.; Ostrometzky, J.; Messer, H. Precipitation Classification Using Measurements from Commercial Microwave Links.
IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 2014, 52, 2350–2356. [CrossRef]
57. Dordević, V.; Pronić-Rančić, O.; Marinkovic, Z.; Milijic, M.; Marković, V.; Siart, U.; Chwala, C.; Kunstmann, H. New method for
detection of precipitation based on artificial neural networks. Microw. Rev. 2013, 19, 50–55.
58. Habi, H.V.; Messer, H. Wet-dry classification using LSTM and commercial microwave links. In Proceedings of the 10th IEEE
Sensor Array and Multichannel Signal Processing Workshop (SAM), Sheffield, UK, 8–11 July 2018; pp. 149–153.
59. He, B.; Liu, X.; Hu, S.; Song, K.; Gao, T. Use of the C-Band Microwave Link to Distinguish between Rainy and Dry Periods. Adv.
Meteorol. 2019, 2019, 3428786. [CrossRef]
Remote Sens. 2023, 15, 4821 24 of 30

60. Song, K.; Liu, X.; Zou, M.; Zhou, D.; Wu, H.; Ji, F. Experimental Study of Detecting Rainfall Using Microwave Links: Classification
of Wet and Dry Periods. IEEE J. Sel. Top. Appl. Earth Obs. Remote Sens. 2020, 13, 5264–5271. [CrossRef]
61. Polz, J.; Chwala, C.; Graf, M.; Kunstmann, H.; Kunstmann, H. Rain event detection in commercial microwave link attenuation
data using convolutional neural networks. Atmos. Meas. Tech. 2020, 13, 3835–3853. [CrossRef]
62. Kamtchoum, E.V.; Nzeukou Takougang, A.C.; Tayou Djamegni, C. A Machine Learning Approach for the Classification of Wet
and Dry Periods Using Commercial Microwave Link Data. SN Comput. Sci. 2022, 3, 227. [CrossRef]
63. Cherkassky, D.; Ostrometzky, J.; Messer, H. The Use of Linear Feature Projection for Precipitation Classification Using Measure-
ments from Commercial Microwave Links. In Proceedings of the Latent Variable Analysis and Signal Separation, Tel Aviv, Israel,
12–15 March 2012; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2012; pp. 511–519.
64. Zinevich, A.; Messer, H.; Alpert, P. Prediction of rainfall intensity measurement errors using commercial microwave communica-
tion links. Atmos. Meas. Tech. 2010, 3, 1385–1402. [CrossRef]
65. Fenicia, F.; Pfister, L.; Kavetski, D.; Matgen, P.; Iffly, J.-F.; Hoffmann, L.; Uijlenhoet, R. Microwave links for rainfall estimation in an
urban environment: Insights from an experimental setup in Luxembourg-City. J. Hydrol. 2012, 464–465, 69–78. [CrossRef]
66. Ostrometzky, J.; Messer, H. Dynamic Determination of the Baseline Level in Microwave Links for Rain Monitoring from Minimum
Attenuation Values. IEEE J. Sel. Top. Appl. Earth Obs. Remote Sens. 2018, 11, 24–33. [CrossRef]
67. Moroder, C.; Siart, U.; Chwala, C.; Kunstmann, H. Modeling of Wet Antenna Attenuation for Precipitation Estimation from
Microwave Links. IEEE Geosci. Remote Sens. Lett. 2020, 17, 386–390. [CrossRef]
68. Kharadly, M.M.Z.; Ross, R. Effect of wet antenna attenuation on propagation data statistics. IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag. 2001,
49, 1183–1191. [CrossRef]
69. García-Rubia, J.M.; Riera, J.M.; Benarroch, A.; García-del-Pino, P. Estimation of Rain Attenuation from Experimental Drop Size
Distributions. IEEE Antennas Wirel. Propag. Lett. 2011, 10, 839–842. [CrossRef]
70. Leijnse, H.; Uijlenhoet, R.; Stricker, J.N.M. Microwave link rainfall estimation: Effects of link length and frequency, temporal
sampling, power resolution, and wet antenna attenuation. Adv. Water. Resour. 2008, 31, 1481–1493. [CrossRef]
71. Valtr, P.; Fencl, M.; Bares, V. Excess Attenuation Caused by Antenna Wetting of Terrestrial Microwave Links at 32 GHz. IEEE
Antennas Wirel. Propag. Lett. 2019, 18, 1636–1640. [CrossRef]
72. Minda, H.; Nakamura, K. High Temporal Resolution Path-Average Rain Gauge with 50-GHz Band Microwave. J. Atmos. Ocean.
Technol. 2005, 22, 165–179. [CrossRef]
73. Pastorek, J.; Fencl, M.; Rieckermann, J.; Bares, V. Precipitation Estimates from Commercial Microwave Links: Practical Approaches
to Wet-Antenna Correction. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 2022, 60, 1–9. [CrossRef]
74. Fencl, M.; Valtr, P.; Kvicera, M.; Bares, V. Quantifying Wet Antenna Attenuation in 38-GHz Commercial Microwave Links of
Cellular Backhaul. IEEE Geosci. Remote Sens. Lett. 2019, 16, 514–518. [CrossRef]
75. Pu, K.; Liu, X.; He, H. Wet Antenna Attenuation Model of E-Band Microwave Links Based on the LSTM Algorithm. IEEE Antennas
Wirel. Propag. Lett. 2020, 19, 1586–1590. [CrossRef]
76. Moroder, C.; Siart, U.; Chwala, C.; Kunstmann, H. Microwave Instrument for Simultaneous Wet Antenna Attenuation and
Precipitation Measurement. IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. 2020, 69, 5853–5861. [CrossRef]
77. ITU. Specific attenuation model for rain for use in prediction methods. In Recommendation ITU-R P.838-3; ITU: Geneva, Switzerland,
2005.
78. Kim, J.H.; Jung, M.-W.; Yoon, Y.K.; Chong, Y.J. The Measurements of Rain Attenuation for Terrestrial Link at millimeter Wave. In
Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference on ICT Convergence (ICTC), Jeju Island, Republic of Korea, 14–16 October 2013.
79. Halder, T.; Adhikari, A.; Maitra, A. Rain attenuation studies from radiometric and rain DSD measurements at two tropical
locations. J. Atmos. Sol. -Terr. Phys. 2018, 170, 11–20. [CrossRef]
80. Juttula, H.; Kokkoniemi, J.; Lehtomaki, J.; Makynen, A.; Juntti, M. Rain Induced Co-Channel Interference at 60 GHz and 300 GHz
Frequencies. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Communications Workshops (ICC Workshops), Shanghai,
China, 20–24 May 2019.
81. Xichuan, L.I.U.; Mingzhong, Z.O.U.; Xuguang, Z. Analysis of Sensitive Parameters of 15~23 GHz Microwave Link Induced by Rain
Attenuation. J. Electron. Inf. Technol. 2021, 43, 2007–2013. Available online: https://jeit.ac.cn/cn/article/doi/10.11999/JEIT200180
(accessed on 23 September 2023).
82. Kim, M.-S.; Kwon, B. Rainfall Detection and Rainfall Rate Estimation Using Microwave Attenuation. Atmosphere 2018, 9, 287.
[CrossRef]
83. Song, K.; Liu, X.; Gao, T.; He, B. Rainfall estimation using a microwave link based on an improved rain-induced attenuation
model. Remote Sens. Lett. 2019, 10, 1057–1066. [CrossRef]
84. Han, C.; Feng, L.; Huo, J.; Deng, Z.; Zhang, G.; Ji, B.; Zhou, Y.; Bi, Y.; Duan, S.; Yuan, R. Characteristics of Rain-Induced
Attenuation over Signal Links at Frequency Ranges of 25 and 38 GHz Observed in Beijing. Remote Sens. 2021, 13, 2156. [CrossRef]
85. Goldshtein, O.; Messer, H.; Zinevich, A. Rain Rate Estimation Using Measurements from Commercial Telecommunications Links.
IEEE Trans. Signal Process. 2009, 57, 1616–1625. [CrossRef]
86. Eshel, A.; Ostrometzky, J.; Gat, S.; Alpert, P.; Messer, H. Spatial Reconstruction of Rain Fields from Wireless Telecommunication
Networks—Scenario-Dependent Analysis of IDW-Based Algorithms. IEEE Geosci. Remote Sens. Lett. 2020, 17, 770–774. [CrossRef]
87. Zheng, X.; Messer, H.; Wang, Q.; Xu, T.; Qin, Y.; Yang, T. On the potential of commercial microwave link networks for high spatial
resolution rainfall monitoring in urban areas. Atmos. Res. 2022, 277, 106289. [CrossRef]
Remote Sens. 2023, 15, 4821 25 of 30

88. Eshel, A.; Messer, H.; Kunstmann, H.; Alpert, P.; Chwala, C. Quantitative Analysis of the Performance of Spatial Interpolation
Methods for Rainfall Estimation Using Commercial Microwave Links. J. Hydrometeorol. 2021, 22, 831–843. [CrossRef]
89. Giuli, D.; Facheris, L.; Tanelli, S. Microwave tomographic inversion technique based on stochastic approach for rainfall fields
monitoring. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 1999, 37, 2536–2555. [CrossRef]
90. Giuli, D.; Facheris, L.; Tanelli, S. A new microwave tomography approach for rainfall monitoring over limited areas. Phys. Chem.
Earth 1997, 22, 265–273. [CrossRef]
91. Graf, M.; El Hachem, A.; Eisele, M.; Seidel, J.; Chwala, C.; Kunstmann, H.; Bárdossy, A. Rainfall estimates from opportunistic
sensors in Germany across spatio-temporal scales. J. Hydrol. Reg. Stud. 2021, 37, 100883. [CrossRef]
92. Blettner, N.; Chwala, C.; Haese, B.; Hörning, S.; Kunstmann, H. Combining Commercial Microwave Link and Rain Gauge
Observations to Estimate Countrywide Precipitation: A Stochastic Reconstruction and Pattern Analysis Approach. Water Resour.
Res. 2022, 58, e2022WR032563. [CrossRef]
93. Haese, B.; Hörning, S.; Chwala, C.; Bárdossy, A.; Schalge, B.; Kunstmann, H. Stochastic Reconstruction and Interpolation of
Precipitation Fields Using Combined Information of Commercial Microwave Links and Rain Gauges. Water Resour. Res. 2017,
53, 10740–10756. [CrossRef]
94. Gazit, L.; Messer, H. Sufficient Conditions for Reconstructing 2-D Rainfall Maps. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 2018,
56, 6334–6343. [CrossRef]
95. Abrajano, G.D.; Okada, M. Compressed sensing based detection of localized heavy rain using microwave network attenuation.
In Proceedings of the 2013 7th European Conference on Antennas and Propagation (EuCAP), Gothenburg, Sweden, 8–12 April
2013; pp. 2383–2386.
96. Roy, V.; Gishkori, S.; Leus, G. Dynamic rainfall monitoring using microwave links. EURASIP J. Adv. Signal Process. 2016, 2016, 77.
[CrossRef]
97. Abrajano, G.; Okada, M. Rainfall field reconstruction using rain attenuation of microwave mesh networks. ECTI Trans. Comput.
Inf. Technol. 2013, 7, 117–125. [CrossRef]
98. Eshel, A.; Alpert, P.; Messer, H. Estimating the Parameters of the Spatial Autocorrelation of Rainfall Fields by Measurements from
Commercial Microwave Links. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 2022, 60, 1–11. [CrossRef]
99. David, N.; Alpert, P.; Messer, H. Technical Note: Novel method for water vapour monitoring using wireless communication
networks measurements. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 2009, 9, 2413–2418. [CrossRef]
100. Chwala, C.; Kunstmann, H.; Hipp, S.; Siart, U. A monostatic microwave transmission experiment for line integrated precipitation
and humidity remote sensing. Atmos. Res. 2014, 144, 57–72. [CrossRef]
101. Montomoli, F.; Macelloni, G.; Facheris, L.; Cuccoli, F.; Del Bianco, S.; Gai, M.; Cortesi, U.; Di Natale, G.; Toccafondi, A.;
Puggelli, F.; et al. Integrated Water Vapor Estimation Through Microwave Propagation Measurements: First Experiment on a
Ground-to-Ground Radio Link. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 2022, 60, 1–13. [CrossRef]
102. Alpert, P.; Rubin, Y. First Daily Mapping of Surface Moisture from Cellular Network Data and Comparison with Both Observa-
tions/ECMWF Product. Geophys. Res. Lett. 2018, 45, 8619–8628. [CrossRef]
103. Fencl, M.; Dohnal, M.; Bareš, V. Retrieving Water Vapor From an E-Band Microwave Link with an Empirical Model Not Requiring
In Situ Calibration. Earth Space Sci. 2021, 8, e2021EA001911. [CrossRef]
104. Song, K.; Liu, X.; Gao, T.; Zhang, P. Estimating Water Vapor Using Signals from Microwave Links below 25 GHz. Remote Sens.
2021, 13, 1409. [CrossRef]
105. Pu, K.; Liu, X.; Liu, L.; Gao, T. Water Vapor Retrieval Using Commercial Microwave Links Based on the LSTM Network. IEEE J.
Sel. Top. Appl. Earth Obs. Remote Sens. 2021, 14, 4330–4338. [CrossRef]
106. David, N.; Sendik, O.; Rubin, Y.; Messer, H.; Gao, H.O.; Rostkier-Edelstein, D.; Alpert, P. Analyzing the ability to reconstruct the
moisture field using commercial microwave network data. Atmos. Res. 2019, 219, 213–222. [CrossRef]
107. Rubin, Y.; Rostkier-Edelstein, D.; Chwala, C.; Alpert, P. Challenges in Diurnal Humidity Analysis from Cellular Microwave Links
(CML) over Germany. Remote Sens. 2022, 14, 2353. [CrossRef]
108. Han, C.; Su, G.; Bao, L.; Messer, H. Water Vapor Density Retrieval Studies Using Commercial Millimeter-Wave Links at 38 GHz
and E-Band. Remote Sens. 2022, 14, 946. [CrossRef]
109. Zheng, S.; Huo, J.; Cai, W.; Zhang, Y.; Li, P.; Zhang, G.; Ji, B.; Zhou, J.; Han, C. Water vapor estimation based on 1-year data of
E-band millimeter wave link in North China. Atmos. Meas. Tech. 2022, 15, 1675–1687. [CrossRef]
110. David, N.; Sendik, O.; Messer, H.; Alpert, P. Cellular Network Infrastructure: The Future of Fog Monitoring? Bull. Am. Meteorol.
Soc. 2015, 96, 1687–1698. [CrossRef]
111. David, N.; Alpert, P.; Messer, H. The potential of commercial microwave networks to monitor dense fog-feasibility study.
J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 2013, 118, 750–761. [CrossRef]
112. David, N.; Gao, H.O. Using Cell-Phone Tower Signals for Detecting the Precursors of Fog. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 2018,
123, 1325–1338. [CrossRef]
113. Harel, O.; David, N.; Alpert, P.; Messer, H. The Potential of Microwave Communication Networks to Detect Dew—Experimental
Study. IEEE J. Sel. Top. Appl. Earth Obs. Remote Sens. 2015, 8, 4396–4404. [CrossRef]
Remote Sens. 2023, 15, 4821 26 of 30

114. Berne, A.; Schleiss, M. Retrieval of the rain drop size distribution using telecommunication dual-polarization microwave links. In
Proceedings of the 34th Conference on Radar Meteorology, Williamsburg, VA, USA, 5–9 October 2009.
115. Song, K.; Liu, X.; Gao, T.; He, B. Raindrop Size Distribution Retrieval Using Joint Dual-Frequency and Dual-Polarization
Microwave Links. Adv. Meteorol. 2019, 2019, 7251870 . [CrossRef]
116. van Leth, T.C.; Leijnse, H.; Overeem, A.; Uijlenhoet, R. Estimating raindrop size distributions using microwave link measurements:
Potential and limitations. Atmos. Meas. Tech. 2020, 13, 1797–1815. [CrossRef]
117. Upton, G.J.G.; Cummings, R.J.; Holt, A.R. Identification of melting snow using data from dual-frequency microwave links.
IET Microw. Antennas Propag. 2007, 1, 282–288. [CrossRef]
118. Upton, G.J.G.; Cummings, R.J.; Holt, A.R. The potential of microwave links for providing information concerning the amount
and type of precipitation. In Proceedings of the 2008 IEEE International Conference Acoustic Speech Signal Process, Las Vegas,
NV, USA, 31 March–4 April 2008; pp. 5153–5156.
119. Pu, K.; Liu, X.; Hu, S.; Gao, T. Hydrometeor Identification Using Multiple-Frequency Microwave Links: A Numerical Simulation.
Remote Sens. 2020, 12, 2158. [CrossRef]
120. Pu, K.; Liu, X.; Xian, M.; Gao, T. Machine Learning Classification of Rainfall Types Based on the Differential Attenuation of
Multiple Frequency Microwave Links. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 2020, 58, 6888–6899. [CrossRef]
121. Ostrometzky, J.; Cherkassky, D.; Messer, H. Accumulated Mixed Precipitation Estimation Using Measurements from Multiple
Microwave Links. Adv. Meteorol. 2015, 2015, 707646. [CrossRef]
122. Leijnse, H.; Uijlenhoet, R.; Stricker, J.N.M. Hydrometeorological application of a microwave link: 1. Evaporation. Water Resour.
Res. 2007, 43, W04416. [CrossRef]
123. David, N.; Gao, H.O. Using Cellular Communication Networks to Detect Air Pollution. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2016, 50, 9442–9451.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
124. Guyot, A.; Pudashine, J.; Uijlenhoet, R.; Protat, A.; Pauwels, V.R.N.; Louf, V.; Walker, J.P. Wildfire Smoke Particulate Matter
Concentration Measurements Using Radio Links from Cellular Communication Networks. AGU Adv. 2021, 2, e2020AV000258.
[CrossRef]
125. David, N.; Gao, H.O. A Data-Driven Approach for Studying the Washout Effects of Rain on Air Pollution. Int. J. Mar. Environ. Sci.
2020, 166, 264–268.
126. Overeem, A.; Leijnse, H.; Uijlenhoet, R. Two and a half years of country-wide rainfall maps using radio links from commercial
cellular telecommunication networks. Water Resour. Res. 2016, 52, 8039–8065. [CrossRef]
127. Overeem, A.; Leijnse, H.; Uijlenhoet, R. Country-wide rainfall maps from cellular communication networks. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.
USA 2013, 110, 2741–2745. [CrossRef]
128. Messer, H.; Zinevich, A.; Alpert, P. Environmental sensor networks using existing wireless communication systems for rainfall
and wind velocity measurements. IEEE Instrum. Meas. Mag. 2012, 15, 32–38. [CrossRef]
129. Zinevich, A.; Messer, H.; Alpert, P. Frontal Rainfall Observation by a Commercial Microwave Communication Network. J. Appl.
Meteorol. Climatol. 2009, 48, 1317–1334. [CrossRef]
130. Bianchi, B.; Rieckermann, J.; Berne, A. Quality control of rain gauge measurements using telecommunication microwave links.
J. Hydrol. 2013, 492, 15–23. [CrossRef]
131. Fencl, M.; Dohnal, M.; Rieckermann, J.; Bareš, V. Gauge-adjusted rainfall estimates from commercial microwave links. Hydrol.
Earth Syst. Sci. 2017, 21, 617–634. [CrossRef]
132. Krämer, S.; Verworn, H.R.; Redder, A. Improvement of X-band radar rainfall estimates using a microwave link. Atmos. Res. 2005,
77, 278–299. [CrossRef]
133. Rahimi, A.R.; Holt, A.R.; Upton, G.J.G. Attenuation Calibration of an X-Band Weather Radar Using a Microwave Link. J. Atmos.
Ocean. Technol. 2006, 23, 395–405. [CrossRef]
134. Kim, M.-S.; Kwon, B.H. Attenuation Correction of X-Band Radar Reflectivity Using Adjacent Multiple Microwave Links. Remote
Sens. 2020, 12, 2133. [CrossRef]
135. Xue, Y.; Liu, X.-c.; Gao, T.-c.; Yang, C.-y.; Song, K. Regional Attenuation Correction of Weather Radar Using a Distributed
Microwave-Links Network. Adv. Meteorol. 2017, 2017, 8621239 . [CrossRef]
136. Zhang, P.; Liu, X.; Li, Z.; Zhou, Z.; Song, K.; Yang, P. Attenuation Correction of Weather Radar Reflectivity with Arbitrary Oriented
Microwave Link. Adv. Meteorol. 2017, 2017, 6124149. [CrossRef]
137. Trömel, S.; Ziegert, M.; Ryzhkov, A.V.; Chwala, C.; Simmer, C. Using Microwave Backhaul Links to Optimize the Performance of
Algorithms for Rainfall Estimation and Attenuation Correction. J. Atmos. Ocean. Technol. 2014, 31, 1748–1760. [CrossRef]
138. Cummings, R.J.; Upton, G.J.G.; Holt, A.R.; Kitchen, M. Using microwave links to adjust the radar rainfall field. Adv. Water. Resour.
2009, 32, 1003–1010. [CrossRef]
139. Liberman, Y.; Samuels, R.; Alpert, P.; Messer, H. New algorithm for integration between wireless microwave sensor network and
radar for improved rainfall measurement and mapping. Atmos. Meas. Tech. 2014, 7, 3549–3563. [CrossRef]
140. Raich, R.; Alpert, P.; Messer, H. Vertical Precipitation Estimation Using Microwave Links in Conjunction with Weather Radar.
Environments 2018, 5, 74. [CrossRef]
141. Kumah, K.K.; Maathuis, B.H.P.; Hoedjes, J.C.B.; Su, Z. Near real-time estimation of high spatiotemporal resolution rainfall from
cloud top properties of the MSG satellite and commercial microwave link rainfall intensities. Atmos. Res. 2022, 279, 106357.
[CrossRef]
Remote Sens. 2023, 15, 4821 27 of 30

142. Rios Gaona, M.F.; Overeem, A.; Brasjen, A.M.; Meirink, J.F.; Leijnse, H.; Uijlenhoet, R. Evaluation of Rainfall Products Derived
from Satellites and Microwave Links for The Netherlands. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 2017, 55, 6849–6859. [CrossRef]
143. Grum, M.; Kraemer, S.; Verworn, H.-R.; Redder, A. Combined use of point rain gauges, radar, microwave link and level
measurements in urban hydrological modelling. Atmos. Res. 2005, 77, 313–321. [CrossRef]
144. Stransky, D.; Fencl, M.; Bares, V. Runoff prediction using rainfall data from microwave links: Tabor case study. Water Sci. Technol.
2018, 2017, 351–359. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
145. Pastorek, J.; Fencl, M.; Rieckermann, J.; Bareš, V. Commercial microwave links for urban drainage modelling: The effect of link
characteristics and their position on runoff simulations. J. Environ. Manag. 2019, 251, 109522. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
146. Turko, M.; Gosset, M.; Bouvier, C.; Chahinian, N.; Alcoba, M.; Kacou, M.; Yappi, A. Rainfall measurement from mobile
telecommunication network and potential benefit for urban hydrology in Africa: A simulation framework for uncertainty
propagation analysis. Proc. Int. Assoc. Hydrol. Sci. 2020, 383, 237–240. [CrossRef]
147. Pastorek, J.; Fencl, M.; Rieckermann, J.; Bareš, V. Microwave link rainfall data for urban drainage modelling: Reducing the
systematic errors under data-scarce conditions. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Urban Drainage (ICUD
2021), Melbourne, Australia, 25–28 October 2021.
148. Pastorek, J.; Fencl, M.; Bareš, V. Uncertainties in discharge predictions based on microwave link rainfall estimates in a small urban
catchment. J. Hydrol. 2023, 617, 129051. [CrossRef]
149. Cazzaniga, G.; De Michele, C.; D’Amico, M.; Deidda, C.; Ghezzi, A.; Nebuloni, R. Hydrological response of a peri-urban
catchment exploiting conventional and unconventional rainfall observations: The case study of Lambro Catchment. Hydrol. Earth
Syst. Sci. 2022, 26, 2093–2111. [CrossRef]
150. Smiatek, G.; Keis, F.; Chwala, C.; Fersch, B.; Kunstmann, H. Potential of commercial microwave link network derived rainfall for
river runoff simulations. Environ. Res. Lett. 2017, 12, 034026. [CrossRef]
151. Brauer, C.C.; Overeem, A.; Leijnse, H.; Uijlenhoet, R. The effect of differences between rainfall measurement techniques on
groundwater and discharge simulations in a lowland catchment. Hydrol. Process. 2016, 30, 3885–3900. [CrossRef]
152. Hoedjes, J.C.B.; Kooiman, A.; Maathuis, B.H.P.; Said, M.Y.; Becht, R.; Limo, A.; Mumo, M.; Nduhiu-Mathenge, J.; Shaka, A.; Su, B.
A Conceptual Flash Flood Early Warning System for Africa, Based on Terrestrial Microwave Links and Flash Flood Guidance.
ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2014, 3, 584–598. [CrossRef]
153. Eshel, A.; Messer, H.; Ostrometzky, J.; Raich, R.; Alpert, P.; Laronne, J.B. On the Use of Measurements from a Commercial
Microwave Link for Evaluation of Flash Floods in Arid Regions. Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss. 2017, 2017, 1–25. [CrossRef]
154. David, N.; Alpert, P.; Messer, H. The potential of cellular network infrastructures for sudden rainfall monitoring in dry climate
regions. Atmos. Res. 2013, 131, 13–21. [CrossRef]
155. Gustilo, R.C. Design of Wireless Disaster Alarm System Using Microwave Links. J. Telecommun. Electron. Comput. Eng. 2018,
10, 103–108.
156. Trömel, S.; Chwala, C.; Furusho-Percot, C.; Henken, C.C.; Polz, J.; Potthast, R.; Reinoso-Rondinel, R.; Simmer, C. Near-Realtime
Quantitative Precipitation Estimation and Prediction (RealPEP). Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 2021, 102, E1591–E1596. [CrossRef]
157. Ostrometzky, J.; Eshel, A. Empirical Study of the Quantization Induced Bias in Commercial Microwave Links’ Min/Max
Attenuation Measurements for Rain Monitoring. Environments 2018, 5, 80. [CrossRef]
158. Roversi, G.; Alberoni, P.P.; Fornasiero, A.; Porcù, F. Commercial microwave links as a tool for operational rainfall monitoring in
Northern Italy. Atmos. Meas. Tech. 2020, 13, 5779–5797. [CrossRef]
159. van Leth, T.C.; Overeem, A.; Leijnse, H.; Uijlenhoet, R. A measurement campaign to assess sources of error in microwave link
rainfall estimation. Atmos. Meas. Tech. 2018, 11, 4645–4669. [CrossRef]
160. Pu, K.; Liu, X.; Sun, X.; Li, S. Error Analysis of Rainfall Inversion Based on Commercial Microwave Links With A–R Relationship
Considering the Rainfall Features. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 2023, 61, 1–12. [CrossRef]
161. Zinevich, A.; Alpert, P.; Messer, H. Estimation of rainfall fields using commercial microwave communication networks of variable
density. Adv. Water. Resour. 2008, 31, 1470–1480. [CrossRef]
162. Ostrometzky, J.; Messer, H. Comparison of Different Methodologies of Parameter-Estimation from Extreme Values. IEEE Signal
Process. Lett. 2017, 24, 1293–1297. [CrossRef]
163. Pudashine, J.; Guyot, A.; Petitjean, F.; Pauwels, V.R.N.; Uijlenhoet, R.; Seed, A.; Prakash, M.; Walker, J.P. Deep Learning for an
Improved Prediction of Rainfall Retrievals from Commercial Microwave Links. Water Resour. Res. 2020, 56, e2019WR026255.
[CrossRef]
164. Guerra-Moreno, I.; Navarro-Mesa, J.L.; García, A.G.; Suarez Araujo, C. On the Application of a Recurrent Neural Network for
Rainfall Quantification Based on the Received Signal from Microwave Links. In Advances in Computational Intelligence; Springer
International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 39–51.
165. Pudashine, J.; Guyot, A.; Overeem, A.; Pauwels, V.R.N.; Seed, A.; Uijlenhoet, R.; Prakash, M.; Walker, J.P. Rainfall retrieval using
commercial microwave links: Effect of sampling strategy on retrieval accuracy. J. Hydrol. 2021, 603, 126909. [CrossRef]
166. de Vos, L.W.; Overeem, A.; Leijnse, H.; Uijlenhoet, R. Rainfall Estimation Accuracy of a Nationwide Instantaneously Sampling
Commercial Microwave Link Network: Error Dependency on Known Characteristics. J. Atmos. Ocean. Technol. 2019, 36, 1267–1283.
[CrossRef]
Remote Sens. 2023, 15, 4821 28 of 30

167. Messer, H. Rainfall Monitoring Using Cellular Networks [In the Spotlight]. IEEE Signal Process. Mag. 2007, 24, 142–144. [CrossRef]
168. Fencl, M.; Dohnal, M.; Valtr, P.; Grabner, M.; Bareš, V. Data and code for the paper Atmospheric Observations with E-band
Microwave Links—Challenges and Opportunities. Atmos. Meas. Tech. 2020, 13, 6559–6578. [CrossRef]
169. Andersson, J.C.M.; Olsson, J.; van de Beek, R.; Hansryd, J. OpenMRG: Open data from Microwave links, Radar, and Gauges for
rainfall quantification in Gothenburg, Sweden. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 2022, 14, 5411–5426. [CrossRef]
170. Špačková, A.; Bareš, V.; Fencl, M.; Schleiss, M.; Jaffrain, J.; Berne, A.; Rieckermann, J. A year of attenuation data from a commercial
dual-polarized duplex microwave link with concurrent disdrometer, rain gauge, and weather observations. Earth Syst. Sci. Data
2021, 13, 4219–4240. [CrossRef]
171. Berne, A.; Uijlenhoet, R. Path-averaged rainfall estimation using microwave links: Uncertainty due to spatial rainfall variability.
Geophys. Res. Lett. 2007, 34, L07403. [CrossRef]
172. Uijlenhoet, R.; Leijnse, H.; Berne, A. Errors and Uncertainties in Microwave Link Rainfall Estimation Explored Using Drop Size
Measurements and High-Resolution Radar Data. J. Hydrometeorol. 2010, 11, 1330–1344. [CrossRef]
173. Gaona, M.F.R.; Overeem, A.; Leijnse, H.; Uijlenhoet, R. Measurement and interpolation uncertainties in rainfall maps from cellular
communication networks. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2015, 19, 3571–3584. [CrossRef]
174. Chwala, C.; Keis, F.; Kunstmann, H. Real-time data acquisition of commercial microwave link networks for hydrometeorological
applications. Atmos. Meas. Tech. 2016, 9, 991–999. [CrossRef]
175. Holt, A.R.; Cummings, R.J.; Upton, G.J.G.; Bradford, W.J. Rain rates, drop size information, and precipitation type, obtained from
one-way differential propagation phase and attenuation along a microwave link. Radio Sci. 2008, 43, 1–18. [CrossRef]
176. Pudashine, J.; Velasco-Forero, C.; Curtis, M.; Guyot, A.; Pauwels, V.R.N.; Walker, J.P.; Seed, A. Probabilistic Attenuation
Nowcasting for the 5G Telecommunication Networks. IEEE Antennas Wirel. Propag. Lett. 2021, 20, 973–977. [CrossRef]
177. Xian, M.; Liu, X.; Yin, M.; Song, K.; Zhao, S.; Gao, T. Rainfall Monitoring Based on Machine Learning by Earth-Space Link in the
Ku Band. IEEE J. Sel. Top. Appl. Earth Obs. Remote Sens. 2020, 13, 3656–3668. [CrossRef]
178. Habi, H.V.; Messer, H. Recurrent Neural Network for Rain Estimation Using Commercial Microwave Links. IEEE Trans. Geosci.
Remote Sens. 2021, 59, 3672–3681. [CrossRef]
179. Messer, H.; Eshel, A.; Habi, H.V.; Sagiv, S.; Zheng, X. Rain Field Retrieval by Ground-Level Sensors of Various Types. Front. Signal
Process. 2022, 2, 877336. [CrossRef]
180. Gazit, L.; Messer, H. Advancements in the Statistical Study, Modeling, and Simulation of Microwave-Links in Cellular Backhaul
Networks. Environments 2018, 5, 75. [CrossRef]
181. Blettner, N.; Fencl, M.; Bareš, V.; Kunstmann, H.; Chwala, C. Transboundary Rainfall Estimation Using Commercial Microwave
Links. Earth Space Sci. 2023, 10, e2023EA002869. [CrossRef]
182. Moshe, D.B.; Messer, H.; Nathan, R.; Sapir, N. Empirical Study on the Effect of Birds on Commercial Microwave Links.
IEEE Access 2022, 10, 103819–103826. [CrossRef]
183. Hunt, K.P.; Niemeier, J.J.; Cunha, L.K.d.; Kruger, A. Using Cellular Network Signal Strength to Monitor Vegetation Characteristics.
IEEE Geosci. Remote Sens. Lett. 2011, 8, 346–349. [CrossRef]
184. Zhang, P.; Liu, X.; Zou, M. Reconstructing and Nowcasting the Rainfall Field by a CML Network. Earth Space Sci. 2023,
10, e2023EA002909. [CrossRef]
185. Imhoff, R.O.; Overeem, A.; Brauer, C.C.; Leijnse, H.; Weerts, A.H.; Uijlenhoet, R. Rainfall Nowcasting Using Commercial
Microwave Links. Geophys. Res. Lett. 2020, 47, 1–10. [CrossRef]
186. Ostrometzky, J.; Raich, R.; Bao, L.; Hansryd, J.; Messer, H. The Wet-Antenna Effect—A Factor to be Considered in Future
Communication Networks. IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag. 2018, 66, 315–322. [CrossRef]
187. Saggese, F.; Lottici, V.; Giannetti, F. Rainfall Map from Attenuation Data Fusion of Satellite Broadcast and Commercial Microwave
Links. Sensors 2022, 22, 7019. [CrossRef]
188. Janco, R.; Ostrometzky, J.; Messer, H. In-City Rain Mapping from Commercial Microwave Links—Challenges and Opportunities.
Sensors 2023, 23, 4653. [CrossRef]
189. Habi, H.V.; Messer, H. Uncertainties in Short Commercial Microwave Links Fading Due to Rain. In Proceedings of the ICASSP
2020 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), Barcelona, Spain, 4–8 May 2020;
pp. 9006–9010.
190. Jacoby, D.; Ostrometzky, J.; Messer, H. Model-based vs. Data-driven Approaches for Predicting Rain-induced Attenuation in
Commercial Microwave Links: A Comparative Empirical Study. In Proceedings of the ICASSP 2023–2023 IEEE International
Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), Rhodes Island, Greece, 4–10 June 2023; pp. 1–5.
191. Daher, A.; Al Sakka, H.; Chaaban, A.K. Low complexity single-layer neural network for enhanced rainfall estimation using
microwave links. J. Hydroinformatics 2023, 25, 101–112. [CrossRef]
192. Wolff, W.; Overeem, A.; Leijnse, H.; Uijlenhoet, R. Rainfall retrieval algorithm for commercial microwave links: Stochastic
calibration. Atmos. Meas. Tech. 2022, 15, 485–502. [CrossRef]
193. Nebuloni, R.; Cazzaniga, G.; D’Amico, M.; Deidda, C.; De Michele, C. Comparison of CML Rainfall Data against Rain Gauges
and Disdrometers in a Mountainous Environment. Sensors 2022, 22, 3218. [CrossRef]
Remote Sens. 2023, 15, 4821 29 of 30

194. Peters, G.; Fischer, B.; Münster, H.; Clemens, M.; Wagner, A. Profiles of Raindrop Size Distributions as Retrieved by Microrain
Radars. J. Appl. Meteorol. 2005, 44, 1930–1949. [CrossRef]
195. Narayana Rao, T.; Kirankumar, N.V.P.; Radhakrishna, B.; Narayana Rao, D. On the variability of the shape-slope parameter
relations of the gamma raindrop size distribution model. Geophys. Res. Lett. 2006, 33, L22809. [CrossRef]
196. Tollefson, J. Mobile-phone signals bolster street-level rain forecasts. Nature 2017, 544, 146–147. [CrossRef]
197. Kamtchoum, E.V.; Takougang, A.C.N.; Djamegni, C.T. Short-term rainfall prediction using MLA based on commercial microwave
links of mobile telecommunication networks. Bull. Atmos. Sci. Technol. 2022, 3, 5. [CrossRef]
198. Han, C.; Huo, J.; Gao, Q.; Su, G.; Wang, H. Rainfall Monitoring Based on Next-Generation Millimeter-Wave Backhaul Technologies
in a Dense Urban Environment. Remote Sens. 2020, 12, 1045. [CrossRef]
199. Zheng, S.; Han, C.; Huo, J.; Cai, W.; Zhang, Y.; Li, P.; Zhang, G.; Ji, B.; Zhou, J. Research on Rainfall Monitoring Based on E-Band
Millimeter Wave Link in East China. Sensors 2021, 21, 1670. [CrossRef]
200. Barthès, L.; Mallet, C. Rainfall measurement from the opportunistic use of an Earth–space link in the Ku band. Atmos. Meas. Tech.
2013, 6, 2181–2193. [CrossRef]
201. Lu, C.S.; Zhao, Z.W.; Wu, Z.S.; Lin, L.K.; Thiennviboon, P.; Zhang, X.; Lv, Z.F. A New Rain Attenuation Prediction Model for the
Earth-Space Links. IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag. 2018, 66, 5432–5442. [CrossRef]
202. Xian, M.-H.; Liu, X.-C.; Yin, M.; Song, K.; Gao, T.-C. Inversion of vertical rainfall field based on earth-space links. Acta Phys. Sin.
2020, 69, 024301. [CrossRef]
203. Shen, X.; Huang, D.D.; Song, B.; Vincent, C.; Togneri, R. 3-D Tomographic Reconstruction of Rain Field Using Microwave Signals
from LEO Satellites: Principle and Simulation Results. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 2019, 57, 5434–5446. [CrossRef]
204. Defeng, H.; Lu, X.; Xuxiang, F.; Wanyu, W. A hypothesis of 3D rainfall tomography using satellite signals. J. Commun. Inf. Netw.
2016, 1, 134–142. [CrossRef]
205. Levchenko, I.; Xu, S.; Wu, Y.-L.; Bazaka, K. Hopes and concerns for astronomy of satellite constellations. Nat. Astron. 2020,
4, 1012–1014. [CrossRef]
206. Zhao, Y.; Liu, X.; Pu, K.; Ye, J.; Xian, M. Research on the Method of Rainfall Field Retrieval Based on the Combination of
Earth–Space Links and Horizontal Microwave Links. Remote Sens. 2022, 14, 2220. [CrossRef]
207. Saggese, F.; Giannetti, F.; Lottici, V. A Novel Approach to Rainfall Rate Estimation based on Fusing Measurements from
Terrestrial Microwave and Satellite Links. In Proceedings of the 2020 XXXIIIrd General Assembly and Scientific Symposium of
the International Union of Radio Science, Rome, Italy, 29 August–5 September 2020; pp. 1–4.
208. Diba, F.D.; Samad, M.A.; Ghimire, J.; Choi, D.Y. Wireless Telecommunication Links for Rainfall Monitoring: Deep Learning
Approach and Experimental Results. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 66769–66780. [CrossRef]
209. Okamura, S.; Oguchi, T. Electromagnetic wave propagation in rain and polarization effects. Proc. Jpn. Academy. Ser. B Phys. Biol.
Sci. 2010, 86, 539–562. [CrossRef]
210. Dalip Kumar, V. Effect of environmental parameters on GSM and GPS. Indian J. Sci. Technol. 2014, 7, 1183–1188.
211. Yadnya, M.; Sudiartha, I. Simulation of broadcast level signal mobile station 3G network rain condition in Mataram. In Proceedings
of the 2016 Asia Pacific Conference on Multimedia and Broadcasting (APMediaCast), Bali, Indonesia, 17–19 November 2016; pp.
24–28.
212. Helhel, S.; Göksu, H.; Ozen, S. Investigation of GSM signal variation: Dry and wet earth effects. Prog. Electromagn. Res. B 2008,
1, 147–157. [CrossRef]
213. Geng, Y.; Edwards, R.M.; Davis, J.G.; Lepper, P.; Pattison, I.; Khouakhi, A.; Clark, B.; Diamantides, K.; Dai, C.; Kaczmarczyk, M.;
et al. Impact of Heavy Rain on Signal Propagation in the UK and Mexican 4G and 5G Networks. In Proceedings of the 2019 13th
European Conference on Antennas and Propagation (EuCAP), Krakow, Poland, 31 March–5 April 2019; pp. 1–5.
214. Micheli, D.; Muratore, G.; Vannelli, A.; Scaloni, A.; Sgheiz, M.; Cirella, P. Rain Effect on 4G LTE In-Car Electromagnetic Propagation
Analyzed Through MDT Radio Data Measurement Reported by Mobile Phones. IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag. 2021, 69, 8641–8651.
[CrossRef]
215. Blevis, B. Losses due to rain on radomes and antenna reflecting surfaces. IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag. 1965, 13, 175–176.
[CrossRef]
216. Cheah, J.Y.C. Wet antenna effect on VSAT rain margin. IEEE Trans. Commun. 1993, 41, 1238–1244. [CrossRef]
217. Beritelli, F.; Capizzi, G.; Lo Sciuto, G.; Scaglione, F.; Połap, D.; Woźniak, M. A Neural Network Pattern Recognition Approach
to Automatic Rainfall Classification by Using Signal Strength in LTE/4G Networks. In Proceedings of the International Joint
Conference on Rough Sets, Olsztyn, Poland, 3–7 July 2017; pp. 505–512.
218. Song, K.; Liu, X.; Gao, T.; Yin, M.; He, B. The Feasibility Analysis of Cellphone Signal to Detect the Rain: Experimental Study.
IEEE Geosci. Remote Sens. Lett. 2020, 17, 1158–1162. [CrossRef]
219. Fang, S.-H.; Cheng, Y.-C.; Chien, Y.-R. Exploiting Sensed Radio Strength and Precipitation for Improved Distance Estimation.
IEEE Sens. J. 2018, 18, 6863–6873. [CrossRef]
220. Liu, D.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, J.; Xiong, L.; Liu, P.; Chen, H.; Yin, J. Rainfall estimation using measurement report data from
time-division long term evolution networks. J. Hydrol. 2021, 600, 126530. [CrossRef]
221. Christofilakis, V.; Tatsis, G.; Chronopoulos, S.K.; Sakkas, A.; Skrivanos, A.G.; Peppas, K.P.; Nistazakis, H.E.; Baldoumas, G.;
Kostarakis, P. Earth-to-Earth Microwave Rain Attenuation Measurements: A Survey on the Recent Literature. Symmetry 2020,
12, 1440. [CrossRef]
Remote Sens. 2023, 15, 4821 30 of 30

222. Messer, H. Capitalizing on Cellular Technology—Opportunities and Challenges for Near Ground Weather Monitoring. Environ-
ments 2018, 5, 73. [CrossRef]
223. Fencl, M.; Dohnal, M.; Mudroch, M.; Bareš, V. Data and code for the paper Atmospheric Observations with E-band Microwave
Links—Challenges and Opportunities. Atmos. Meas. Tech. 2020, 13, 6559–6578. [CrossRef]

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.