An AeroCom/AeroSat study: intercomparison of satellite AODDatasets for Aerosol Model Evaluation
To better understand current uncertainties in the important observational constraint to climate models of AOD (Aerosol Optical Depth), we evaluate and intercompare fourteen satellite products, representing 9 different retrieval algorithm families using observations from 5 different sensors on 6 diff...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
European Geosciences Union
2020
|
| _version_ | 1797100862265360384 |
|---|---|
| author | Schutgens, N Sayer, S Heckel, A Hsu, C Jethva, H de Leeuw, G Leonard, P Levy, R Lipponen, A Lyapustin, A North, P Popp, T Poulson, C Sawyer, V Sogacheva, L Thomas, G Torres, O Wang, Y Kinne, S Schulz, M Stier, P |
| author_facet | Schutgens, N Sayer, S Heckel, A Hsu, C Jethva, H de Leeuw, G Leonard, P Levy, R Lipponen, A Lyapustin, A North, P Popp, T Poulson, C Sawyer, V Sogacheva, L Thomas, G Torres, O Wang, Y Kinne, S Schulz, M Stier, P |
| author_sort | Schutgens, N |
| collection | OXFORD |
| description | To better understand current uncertainties in the important observational constraint to climate models of AOD
(Aerosol Optical Depth), we evaluate and intercompare fourteen satellite products, representing 9 different retrieval algorithm families using observations from 5 different sensors on 6 different platforms. The satellite products, super-observations
consisting of 1 o × 1 o daily aggregated retrievals drawn from the years 2006, 2008 and 2010, are evaluated with AERONET
(AErosol RObotic NETwork) and MAN (Maritime Aerosol Network) data. Results show that different products exhibit different regionally varying biases (both under- and overestimates) that may reach ±50%, although a typical bias would be 15−25% (depending on product). In addition to these biases, the products exhibit random errors that can be 1.6 to 3 times as large. Most products show similar performance, although there are a few exceptions with either larger biases or larger random errors. The intercomparison of satellite products extends this analysis and provides spatial context to it. In particular, we show that
aggregated satellite AOD agrees much better than the spatial coverage (often driven by cloud masks) within the cells. Up to 50% of the difference between satellite AOD is attributed to cloud contamination. The diversity in AOD products
shows clear spatial patterns and varies from 10% (parts of the ocean) to 100% (central Asia and Australia). More importantly,
we show that the diversity may be used as an indication of AOD uncertainty, at least for the better performing products. This
provides modellers with a global map of expected AOD uncertainty in satellite products, allows assessment of products away from AERONET sites, can provide guidance for future AERONET locations, and offers suggestions for product improvements. We account for statistical and sampling noise in our analyses. Sampling noise, variations due to the evaluation of different subsets of the data, causes important changes in error metrics. The consequences of this noise term for product evaluation are discussed. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-07T05:43:41Z |
| format | Journal article |
| id | oxford-uuid:e6765671-2836-459f-a5c5-f470a28f3097 |
| institution | University of Oxford |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-07T05:43:41Z |
| publishDate | 2020 |
| publisher | European Geosciences Union |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | oxford-uuid:e6765671-2836-459f-a5c5-f470a28f30972022-03-27T10:31:23ZAn AeroCom/AeroSat study: intercomparison of satellite AODDatasets for Aerosol Model EvaluationJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:e6765671-2836-459f-a5c5-f470a28f3097EnglishSymplectic ElementsEuropean Geosciences Union2020Schutgens, NSayer, SHeckel, AHsu, CJethva, Hde Leeuw, GLeonard, PLevy, RLipponen, ALyapustin, ANorth, PPopp, TPoulson, CSawyer, VSogacheva, LThomas, GTorres, OWang, YKinne, SSchulz, MStier, PTo better understand current uncertainties in the important observational constraint to climate models of AOD (Aerosol Optical Depth), we evaluate and intercompare fourteen satellite products, representing 9 different retrieval algorithm families using observations from 5 different sensors on 6 different platforms. The satellite products, super-observations consisting of 1 o × 1 o daily aggregated retrievals drawn from the years 2006, 2008 and 2010, are evaluated with AERONET (AErosol RObotic NETwork) and MAN (Maritime Aerosol Network) data. Results show that different products exhibit different regionally varying biases (both under- and overestimates) that may reach ±50%, although a typical bias would be 15−25% (depending on product). In addition to these biases, the products exhibit random errors that can be 1.6 to 3 times as large. Most products show similar performance, although there are a few exceptions with either larger biases or larger random errors. The intercomparison of satellite products extends this analysis and provides spatial context to it. In particular, we show that aggregated satellite AOD agrees much better than the spatial coverage (often driven by cloud masks) within the cells. Up to 50% of the difference between satellite AOD is attributed to cloud contamination. The diversity in AOD products shows clear spatial patterns and varies from 10% (parts of the ocean) to 100% (central Asia and Australia). More importantly, we show that the diversity may be used as an indication of AOD uncertainty, at least for the better performing products. This provides modellers with a global map of expected AOD uncertainty in satellite products, allows assessment of products away from AERONET sites, can provide guidance for future AERONET locations, and offers suggestions for product improvements. We account for statistical and sampling noise in our analyses. Sampling noise, variations due to the evaluation of different subsets of the data, causes important changes in error metrics. The consequences of this noise term for product evaluation are discussed. |
| spellingShingle | Schutgens, N Sayer, S Heckel, A Hsu, C Jethva, H de Leeuw, G Leonard, P Levy, R Lipponen, A Lyapustin, A North, P Popp, T Poulson, C Sawyer, V Sogacheva, L Thomas, G Torres, O Wang, Y Kinne, S Schulz, M Stier, P An AeroCom/AeroSat study: intercomparison of satellite AODDatasets for Aerosol Model Evaluation |
| title | An AeroCom/AeroSat study: intercomparison of satellite AODDatasets for Aerosol Model Evaluation |
| title_full | An AeroCom/AeroSat study: intercomparison of satellite AODDatasets for Aerosol Model Evaluation |
| title_fullStr | An AeroCom/AeroSat study: intercomparison of satellite AODDatasets for Aerosol Model Evaluation |
| title_full_unstemmed | An AeroCom/AeroSat study: intercomparison of satellite AODDatasets for Aerosol Model Evaluation |
| title_short | An AeroCom/AeroSat study: intercomparison of satellite AODDatasets for Aerosol Model Evaluation |
| title_sort | aerocom aerosat study intercomparison of satellite aoddatasets for aerosol model evaluation |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT schutgensn anaerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT sayers anaerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT heckela anaerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT hsuc anaerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT jethvah anaerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT deleeuwg anaerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT leonardp anaerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT levyr anaerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT lipponena anaerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT lyapustina anaerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT northp anaerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT poppt anaerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT poulsonc anaerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT sawyerv anaerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT sogacheval anaerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT thomasg anaerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT torreso anaerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT wangy anaerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT kinnes anaerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT schulzm anaerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT stierp anaerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT schutgensn aerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT sayers aerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT heckela aerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT hsuc aerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT jethvah aerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT deleeuwg aerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT leonardp aerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT levyr aerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT lipponena aerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT lyapustina aerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT northp aerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT poppt aerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT poulsonc aerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT sawyerv aerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT sogacheval aerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT thomasg aerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT torreso aerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT wangy aerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT kinnes aerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT schulzm aerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation AT stierp aerocomaerosatstudyintercomparisonofsatelliteaoddatasetsforaerosolmodelevaluation |