4.5 Article

Machine learning-based aerosol characterization using OCO-2 O2 A-band observations

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jqsrt.2021.108049

关键词

OCO-2; Aerosol; Critical albedo; CALIPSO; Machine learning; O2-A Band

资金

  1. National Aeronautics and Space Administration [80NM0018D0 004]
  2. NASA Earth Science US Participating Investigator program [NNH16ZDA001N-ESUSPI]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper presents an improved method for retrieving aerosol parameters from OCO-2 measurements, which leads to an enhanced accuracy in XCO2 retrieval. By using a combination of radiance measurements in the continuum and inside the absorption band, the aerosol optical depth, layer height, and uncertainties can be accurately predicted.
Aerosol scattering influences the retrieval of the column-averaged dry-air mole fraction of CO2 (XCO2) from the Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2 (OCO-2). This is especially true for surfaces with reflectance close to a critical value where there is very low sensitivity to aerosol loading. A spectral sorting approach was introduced to improve the characterization of aerosols over coastal regions. Here, we generalize this procedure to land surfaces and use a two-step neural network to retrieve aerosol parameters from OCO-2 measurements. We show that, by using a combination of radiance measurements in the continuum and inside the absorption band, both the aerosol optical depth and layer height, as well as their uncertainties, can be accurately predicted. Using the improved aerosol estimates as a priori, we demonstrate that the accuracy of the XCO2 retrieval can be significantly improved compared to the OCO-2 Level-2 Standard product. Furthermore, using simulated observations, we obtain estimates of the error in the retrieved XCO2. These simulations indicate that the bias-corrected OCO-2 Lite data, which is used for flux inversions, may have remaining biases due to interference of aerosol effects. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

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