2013
DOI: 10.5194/amt-6-3325-2013
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of SMILES ClO profiles with satellite, balloon-borne and ground-based measurements

Abstract: Abstract.We evaluate the quality of ClO profiles derived from the Superconducting Submillimeter-Wave LimbEmission Sounder (SMILES) on the International Space Station (ISS). Version 2.1.5 of the level-2 product generated by the National Institute of Information and Communications Technology (NICT) is the subject of this study. Based on sensitivity studies, the systematic error was estimated as 5-10 pptv at the pressure range of 80-20 hPa, 35 pptv at the ClO peak altitude (∼ 4 hPa), and 5-10 pptv at pressures ≤ … Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
27
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 42 publications
0
27
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Theoretical estimations of the systematic errors are done by a forward-model simulation using a certain reference atmospheric state, and they do not include the actual measurement noise of SMILES observations in order to estimate the maximum impact of each error factor on the bias uncertainties. According to Sagawa et al (2013), the systematic error for ClO is up to about 3 % at 0.28 hPa for the mid-latitude nighttime. In this study, we adopt the systematic error of 3 %, which is derived from the theoretical systematic error analysis of ClO, for all the considered species.…”
Section: Diurnal Variation Observed By Smilesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…Theoretical estimations of the systematic errors are done by a forward-model simulation using a certain reference atmospheric state, and they do not include the actual measurement noise of SMILES observations in order to estimate the maximum impact of each error factor on the bias uncertainties. According to Sagawa et al (2013), the systematic error for ClO is up to about 3 % at 0.28 hPa for the mid-latitude nighttime. In this study, we adopt the systematic error of 3 %, which is derived from the theoretical systematic error analysis of ClO, for all the considered species.…”
Section: Diurnal Variation Observed By Smilesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The systematic error (bias) of SMILES NICT ClO data was estimated in a theoretical manner by Sato et al (2012) and Sagawa et al (2013). Theoretical estimations of the systematic errors are done by a forward-model simulation using a certain reference atmospheric state, and they do not include the actual measurement noise of SMILES observations in order to estimate the maximum impact of each error factor on the bias uncertainties.…”
Section: Diurnal Variation Observed By Smilesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations