4.7 Article

An intercomparison of microphysical retrieval algorithms for upper-tropospheric ice clouds

期刊

出版社

AMER METEOROLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1175/BAMS-88-2-191

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The large horizontal extent, with its location in the cold upper troposphere, and ice composition make cirrus clouds important modulators of the Earth's radiation budget and climate. Cirrus cloud microphysical properties are difficult to measure and model because they are inhomogeneous in nature and their ice crystal size distribution and habit are not well characterized. Accurate retrievals of cloud properties are crucial for improving the representation of cloud-scale processes in large-scale models and for accurately predicting the Earth's future climate. A number of passive and active remote sensing retrieval algorithms exist for estimating the microphysical properties of upper-tropospheric clouds. We believe significant progress has been made in the evolution of these retrieval algorithms in the last decade; however, there is room for improvement. Members of the Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) program Cloud Properties Working Group are involved in an intercomparison of optical depth (tau) and ice water path in ice clouds retrieved using ground-based instruments. The goals of this intercomparison are to evaluate the accuracy of state-of-the-art algorithms, quantify the uncertainties, and make recommendations for their improvement. Currently, there are significant discrepancies among the algorithms for ice clouds with very small optical depths (tau < 0.3) and those with 1 < tau < 5. The good news is that for thin clouds (0.3 < tau < 1), the algorithms tend to converge. In this first stage of the intercomparison, we present results from a representative case study, compare the retrieved cloud properties with aircraft and satellite measurements, and perform a radiative closure experiment to begin gauging the accuracy of these retrieval algorithms.

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

4.7
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