4.3 Article

Estimating the uncertainty of using GPS radio occultation data for climate monitoring: Intercomparison of CHAMP refractivity climate records from 2002 to 2006 from different data centers

期刊

出版社

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1029/2009JD011969

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Science Foundation
  2. NOAA [NA07OAR4310224]
  3. Austrian Science Fund FWF [CLIMROCC, INDICATE]
  4. Austrian Research Promotion Agency FFG [EOPSCLIM]
  5. European Space Agency [ProdexCN2-EGOPS6]
  6. Max Kade Foundation (New York)
  7. UCAR
  8. U.S. NOAA [NA 06 0AR4310121]
  9. DECC [GA01101]
  10. Defra [GA01101]
  11. MoD Integrated Climate Programme [CBC/2B/0417_Annex C5]
  12. Austrian Science Fund (FWF) [P 21642] Funding Source: researchfish
  13. Div Atmospheric & Geospace Sciences
  14. Directorate For Geosciences [0939962] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To examine the suitability of GPS radio occultation (RO) observations as a climate benchmark data set, this study aims at quantifying the structural uncertainty in GPS RO-derived vertical profiles of refractivity and measured refractivity trends obtained from atmospheric excess phase processing and inversion procedures. Five years (2002-2006) of monthly mean climatologies (MMC) of retrieved refractivity from the experiment aboard the German satellite CHAMP generated by four RO operational centers were compared. Results show that the absolute values of fractional refractivity anomalies among the centers are, in general, <= 0.2% from 8 to 25 km altitude. The median absolute deviations among the centers are less than 0.2% globally. Because the differences in fractional refractivity produced by the four centers are, in general, unchanging with time, the uncertainty of the trend for fractional refractivity anomalies among centers is +/-0.04% per 5 years globally. The primary cause of the trend uncertainty is due to different quality control methods used by the four centers, which yield different sampling errors for different centers. We used the National Centers for Environmental Prediction reanalysis in the same period to estimate sampling errors. After removing the sampling errors, the uncertainty of the trend for fractional refractivity anomalies among centers is between -0.03 and 0.01% per 5 years. Thus 0.03% per 5 years can be considered an upper bound in the processing scheme-induced uncertainty for global refractivity trend monitoring. Systematic errors common to all centers are not discussed in this article but are generally believed to be small.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据