Quantifying uncertainty in climatological fields from GPS radio occultation: an empirical-analytical error model

Due to the measurement principle of the radio occultation (RO) technique, RO data are highly suitable for climate studies. RO profiles can be used to build climatological fields of different atmospheric parameters like bending angle, refractivity, density, pressure, geopotential height, and temperat...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: B. Scherllin-Pirscher, G. Kirchengast, A. K. Steiner, Y.-H. Kuo, U. Foelsche
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Copernicus Publications 2011-09-01
Series:Atmospheric Measurement Techniques
Online Access:http://www.atmos-meas-tech.net/4/2019/2011/amt-4-2019-2011.pdf
_version_ 1819058078123819008
author B. Scherllin-Pirscher
G. Kirchengast
A. K. Steiner
Y.-H. Kuo
U. Foelsche
author_facet B. Scherllin-Pirscher
G. Kirchengast
A. K. Steiner
Y.-H. Kuo
U. Foelsche
author_sort B. Scherllin-Pirscher
collection DOAJ
description Due to the measurement principle of the radio occultation (RO) technique, RO data are highly suitable for climate studies. RO profiles can be used to build climatological fields of different atmospheric parameters like bending angle, refractivity, density, pressure, geopotential height, and temperature. RO climatologies are affected by random (statistical) errors, sampling errors, and systematic errors, yielding a total climatological error. Based on empirical error estimates, we provide a simple analytical error model for these error components, which accounts for vertical, latitudinal, and seasonal variations. The vertical structure of each error component is modeled constant around the tropopause region. Above this region the error increases exponentially, below the increase follows an inverse height power-law. The statistical error strongly depends on the number of measurements. It is found to be the smallest error component for monthly mean 10° zonal mean climatologies with more than 600 measurements per bin. Due to smallest atmospheric variability, the sampling error is found to be smallest at low latitudes equatorwards of 40°. Beyond 40°, this error increases roughly linearly, with a stronger increase in hemispheric winter than in hemispheric summer. The sampling error model accounts for this hemispheric asymmetry. However, we recommend to subtract the sampling error when using RO climatologies for climate research since the residual sampling error remaining after such subtraction is estimated to be only about 30% of the original one or less. The systematic error accounts for potential residual biases in the measurements as well as in the retrieval process and generally dominates the total climatological error. Overall the total error in monthly means is estimated to be smaller than 0.07% in refractivity and 0.15 K in temperature at low to mid latitudes, increasing towards higher latitudes. This study focuses on dry atmospheric parameters as retrieved from RO measurements so for context we also quantitatively explain the difference between dry and physical atmospheric parameters, which can be significant at altitudes below about 6 km (high latitudes) to 10 km (low latitudes).
first_indexed 2024-12-21T13:49:29Z
format Article
id doaj.art-c6dabb8c91cf4ad08a21ededb90151c7
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1867-1381
1867-8548
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-21T13:49:29Z
publishDate 2011-09-01
publisher Copernicus Publications
record_format Article
series Atmospheric Measurement Techniques
spelling doaj.art-c6dabb8c91cf4ad08a21ededb90151c72022-12-21T19:01:46ZengCopernicus PublicationsAtmospheric Measurement Techniques1867-13811867-85482011-09-01492019203410.5194/amt-4-2019-2011Quantifying uncertainty in climatological fields from GPS radio occultation: an empirical-analytical error modelB. Scherllin-PirscherG. KirchengastA. K. SteinerY.-H. KuoU. FoelscheDue to the measurement principle of the radio occultation (RO) technique, RO data are highly suitable for climate studies. RO profiles can be used to build climatological fields of different atmospheric parameters like bending angle, refractivity, density, pressure, geopotential height, and temperature. RO climatologies are affected by random (statistical) errors, sampling errors, and systematic errors, yielding a total climatological error. Based on empirical error estimates, we provide a simple analytical error model for these error components, which accounts for vertical, latitudinal, and seasonal variations. The vertical structure of each error component is modeled constant around the tropopause region. Above this region the error increases exponentially, below the increase follows an inverse height power-law. The statistical error strongly depends on the number of measurements. It is found to be the smallest error component for monthly mean 10° zonal mean climatologies with more than 600 measurements per bin. Due to smallest atmospheric variability, the sampling error is found to be smallest at low latitudes equatorwards of 40°. Beyond 40°, this error increases roughly linearly, with a stronger increase in hemispheric winter than in hemispheric summer. The sampling error model accounts for this hemispheric asymmetry. However, we recommend to subtract the sampling error when using RO climatologies for climate research since the residual sampling error remaining after such subtraction is estimated to be only about 30% of the original one or less. The systematic error accounts for potential residual biases in the measurements as well as in the retrieval process and generally dominates the total climatological error. Overall the total error in monthly means is estimated to be smaller than 0.07% in refractivity and 0.15 K in temperature at low to mid latitudes, increasing towards higher latitudes. This study focuses on dry atmospheric parameters as retrieved from RO measurements so for context we also quantitatively explain the difference between dry and physical atmospheric parameters, which can be significant at altitudes below about 6 km (high latitudes) to 10 km (low latitudes).http://www.atmos-meas-tech.net/4/2019/2011/amt-4-2019-2011.pdf
spellingShingle B. Scherllin-Pirscher
G. Kirchengast
A. K. Steiner
Y.-H. Kuo
U. Foelsche
Quantifying uncertainty in climatological fields from GPS radio occultation: an empirical-analytical error model
Atmospheric Measurement Techniques
title Quantifying uncertainty in climatological fields from GPS radio occultation: an empirical-analytical error model
title_full Quantifying uncertainty in climatological fields from GPS radio occultation: an empirical-analytical error model
title_fullStr Quantifying uncertainty in climatological fields from GPS radio occultation: an empirical-analytical error model
title_full_unstemmed Quantifying uncertainty in climatological fields from GPS radio occultation: an empirical-analytical error model
title_short Quantifying uncertainty in climatological fields from GPS radio occultation: an empirical-analytical error model
title_sort quantifying uncertainty in climatological fields from gps radio occultation an empirical analytical error model
url http://www.atmos-meas-tech.net/4/2019/2011/amt-4-2019-2011.pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT bscherllinpirscher quantifyinguncertaintyinclimatologicalfieldsfromgpsradiooccultationanempiricalanalyticalerrormodel
AT gkirchengast quantifyinguncertaintyinclimatologicalfieldsfromgpsradiooccultationanempiricalanalyticalerrormodel
AT aksteiner quantifyinguncertaintyinclimatologicalfieldsfromgpsradiooccultationanempiricalanalyticalerrormodel
AT yhkuo quantifyinguncertaintyinclimatologicalfieldsfromgpsradiooccultationanempiricalanalyticalerrormodel
AT ufoelsche quantifyinguncertaintyinclimatologicalfieldsfromgpsradiooccultationanempiricalanalyticalerrormodel