FY-4A GIIRS temperature profile products have provided unprecedented information for studying the atmospheric characteristics of thermal structures since 2020. The main objective of this paper is to evaluate GIIRS temperature profile products by using radiosonde observations and then apply them to the diagnosis of winter precipitation types in southern China. GIIRS temperature profile products for four types (clear sky perfect quality, cloudy sky perfect quality, cloudy sky good quality and cloudy sky bad quality) show different performances. Relatively, the cloud can affect the quality and quantity of GIIRS products. At different pressure levels, the perfect flagged data under the clear or cloudy sky show the best agreement with radiosonde observations, yielding the highest Pearson correlation coefficient and lowest mean bias as well as root mean square error. The good flagged data have a slight deviation from the perfect data. The impact on the quantity of the GIIRS temperature data is greater than that on the quality with an increase in cloud top height. A case investigation was carried out to analyze the performance of GIIRS temperature profiles for the diagnosis of precipitation types in a winter storm of 2022. The GIIRS temperature profiles represent the reasonable atmospheric thermal structures in the rain and snow in Hubei and Hunan provinces. The GIIRS temperature below 700 hPa is an important indictor to precipitation type diagnosis. Furthermore, two critical thresholds for GIIRS temperatures, which are below −2 °C at 850 hPa and below 0 °C at 925 hPa, respectively, are proposed for the occurrence of snowfall in this winter storm. In addition, the distribution of GIIRS temperature at different pressure levels is consistent with radiosonde observations in a freezing rain event in Guiyang, all of which show the warm rain mechanism by combining the cloud top information.

This paper proposes a novel precipitation estimation method based on FY-4B meteorological satellite data (FY-4B_AI). This method facilitates the spatiotemporal matching of 125 features derived from the multi-temporal and multi-channel data of the FY-4B satellite with precipitation data at stations. Subsequently, a precipitation model was constructed using the light gradient boosting machine (LGBM) algorithm. A comparative analysis of FY-4B_AI and GPM/IMERG-L products for over 450 million station cases throughout 2023 revealed the following: (1) The results demonstrate that FY-4B_AI is more accurate than GPM/IMERG-L. Six of the eight evaluation indices exhibit superior performance for FY-4B_AI in comparison to GPM/IMERG-L. These indices include the mean absolute error (MAE), root mean square error (RMSE), relative error (RE), correlation coefficient (CC), probability of detection (POD), and critical success index (CSI). As for the MAE, the results are 1.67 (FY-4B_AI) and 1.92 (GPM/IMERG-L), respectively. The RMSEs are 3.68 and 4.07, respectively. The REs are 17.72% and 26.28%, respectively. The CCs are 0.44 and 0.36, respectively. The PODs are 61.84% and 47.31%, respectively. The CSIs are 0.30 and 0.27, respectively. However, with regard to the mean errors (MEs) and false alarm rates (FARs), FY-4B_AI (−0.88 and 62.85%, respectively) displays a slight degree of inferiority in comparison to GPM/IMERG-L (−0.80 and 62.21%, respectively). (2) An evaluation of two strong weather events to represent the spatial distribution of precipitation in different climatic zones revealed that both FY-4B_AI and GPM/IMERG-L are equally capable of accurately representing these phenomena, irrespective of whether the region in question is humid, as is the case in the southeast, or dry, as is the case in the northwest.

A smart precipitation estimation method based on FY-4B meteorological satellite data (FY-4B_AI) is proposed in this paper. This method spatiotemporally matches 125 features derived from multi-temporal and multi-channels of FY-4B satellite data with the precipitation at stations. Then a precipitation model using the Light Gradient Boosting Machine algorithm is constructed. Comparative results between FY-4B_AI and GPM/IMERG-L products for over 450 million station cases throughout 2023 shows that: 1) FY-4B_AI is superior to GPM IMERG-L in the average absolute error, root mean square error, relative error, correlation coefficient, probability of detection and critical success index. While in the mean error and false alarm rate, FY-4B_AI is slightly inferior to GPM/IMERG-L. 2) Evaluation of strong weather event applications reveals that both FY-4B_AI and GPM/IMERG-L can accurately represent the spatial distribution characteristics of precipitation, no matter in the southeast humid region or the northwest dry region. Notably, FY-4B_AI, due to its higher spatiotemporal resolution, provides a more detailed distribution of precipitation.