4.5 Article

Characteristics of the Reanalysis and Satellite-Based Surface Net Radiation Data in the Arctic

期刊

JOURNAL OF SENSORS
卷 2020, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

HINDAWI LTD
DOI: 10.1155/2020/8825870

关键词

-

资金

  1. Korea Polar Research Institute (KOPRI) [PE20080]
  2. U.S. Department of Energy as part of the Atmospheric Radiation Measurement Program
  3. Korea Polar Research Institute of Marine Research Placement (KOPRI) [PE20080] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)
  4. National Research Foundation of Korea [4199990513986] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, we compared four net radiation products: the fifth generation of European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts atmospheric reanalysis of the global climate (ERA5), National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP), Clouds and the Earth's Radiant Energy System Energy Balanced and Filled (EBAF), and Global Energy and Water Exchanges (GEWEX), based on ground observation data and intercomparison data. ERA5 showed the highest accuracy, followed by EBAF, GEWEX, and NCEP. When analyzing the validation grid, ERA5 showed the most similar data distribution to ground observation data. Different characteristics were observed between the reanalysis data and satellite data. In the case of satellite-based data, the net radiation value tended to increase at high latitudes. Compared with the reanalysis data, Greenland and the central Arctic appeared to be overestimated. All data were highly correlated, with a difference of 6-21 W/m(2)among the products examined in this study. Error was attributed mainly to difficulties in predicting long-term climate change and having to combine net radiation data from several sources. This study highlights criteria that may be helpful in selecting data for future climate research models of this region.

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

4.5
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