The importance of temporal collocation for the evaluation of aerosol models with observations

This is the final version of the article. Available from European Geosciences Union (EGU) and Copernicus Publications via the DOI in this record. It is often implicitly assumed that over suitably long periods the mean of observations and models should be comparable, even if they have different tempo...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics
Main Authors: Schutgens, NAJ, Partridge, DG, Stier, P
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:English
Published: European Geosciences Union (EGU) and Copernicus Publications 2016
Subjects:
Online Access:http://hdl.handle.net/10871/31971
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-1065-2016
id ftunivexeter:oai:ore.exeter.ac.uk:10871/31971
record_format openpolar
spelling ftunivexeter:oai:ore.exeter.ac.uk:10871/31971 2024-09-15T17:35:17+00:00 The importance of temporal collocation for the evaluation of aerosol models with observations Schutgens, NAJ Partridge, DG Stier, P 2016 http://hdl.handle.net/10871/31971 https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-1065-2016 en eng European Geosciences Union (EGU) and Copernicus Publications Vol. 16, pp. 1065 - 1079 https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-1065-2016 http://hdl.handle.net/10871/31971 Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics © The Author(s). Open Access. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Attribution 3.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/), which permits non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. temporal collocation aerosol models Article 2016 ftunivexeter https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-1065-2016 2024-07-29T03:24:16Z This is the final version of the article. Available from European Geosciences Union (EGU) and Copernicus Publications via the DOI in this record. It is often implicitly assumed that over suitably long periods the mean of observations and models should be comparable, even if they have different temporal sampling. We assess the errors incurred due to ignoring temporal sampling and show that they are of similar magnitude as (but smaller than) actual model errors (20–60 %). Using temporal sampling from remote-sensing data sets, the satellite imager MODIS (MODerate resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer) and the ground-based sun photometer network AERONET (AErosol Robotic NETwork), and three different global aerosol models, we compare annual and monthly averages of full model data to sampled model data. Our results show that sampling errors as large as 100 % in AOT (aerosol optical thickness), 0.4 in AE (Ångström Exponent) and 0.05 in SSA (single scattering albedo) are possible. Even in daily averages, sampling errors can be significant. Moreover these sampling errors are often correlated over long distances giving rise to artificial contrasts between pristine and polluted events and regions. Additionally, we provide evidence that suggests that models will underestimate these errors. To prevent sampling errors, model data should be temporally collocated to the observations before any analysis is made. We also discuss how this work has consequences for in situ measurements (e.g. aircraft campaigns or surface measurements) in model evaluation. Although this study is framed in the context of model evaluation, it has a clear and direct relevance to climatologies derived from observational data sets. This work was supported by the Natural Environmental Research Council grant nr NE/J024252/1 (Global Aerosol Synthesis And Science Project). Computational resources for the ECHAM-HAM runs were made available by Deutsches Klimarechenzentrum (DKRZ) through support from the Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (BMBF). ... Article in Journal/Newspaper Aerosol Robotic Network University of Exeter: Open Research Exeter (ORE) Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics 16 2 1065 1079
institution Open Polar
collection University of Exeter: Open Research Exeter (ORE)
op_collection_id ftunivexeter
language English
topic temporal collocation
aerosol models
spellingShingle temporal collocation
aerosol models
Schutgens, NAJ
Partridge, DG
Stier, P
The importance of temporal collocation for the evaluation of aerosol models with observations
topic_facet temporal collocation
aerosol models
description This is the final version of the article. Available from European Geosciences Union (EGU) and Copernicus Publications via the DOI in this record. It is often implicitly assumed that over suitably long periods the mean of observations and models should be comparable, even if they have different temporal sampling. We assess the errors incurred due to ignoring temporal sampling and show that they are of similar magnitude as (but smaller than) actual model errors (20–60 %). Using temporal sampling from remote-sensing data sets, the satellite imager MODIS (MODerate resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer) and the ground-based sun photometer network AERONET (AErosol Robotic NETwork), and three different global aerosol models, we compare annual and monthly averages of full model data to sampled model data. Our results show that sampling errors as large as 100 % in AOT (aerosol optical thickness), 0.4 in AE (Ångström Exponent) and 0.05 in SSA (single scattering albedo) are possible. Even in daily averages, sampling errors can be significant. Moreover these sampling errors are often correlated over long distances giving rise to artificial contrasts between pristine and polluted events and regions. Additionally, we provide evidence that suggests that models will underestimate these errors. To prevent sampling errors, model data should be temporally collocated to the observations before any analysis is made. We also discuss how this work has consequences for in situ measurements (e.g. aircraft campaigns or surface measurements) in model evaluation. Although this study is framed in the context of model evaluation, it has a clear and direct relevance to climatologies derived from observational data sets. This work was supported by the Natural Environmental Research Council grant nr NE/J024252/1 (Global Aerosol Synthesis And Science Project). Computational resources for the ECHAM-HAM runs were made available by Deutsches Klimarechenzentrum (DKRZ) through support from the Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (BMBF). ...
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Schutgens, NAJ
Partridge, DG
Stier, P
author_facet Schutgens, NAJ
Partridge, DG
Stier, P
author_sort Schutgens, NAJ
title The importance of temporal collocation for the evaluation of aerosol models with observations
title_short The importance of temporal collocation for the evaluation of aerosol models with observations
title_full The importance of temporal collocation for the evaluation of aerosol models with observations
title_fullStr The importance of temporal collocation for the evaluation of aerosol models with observations
title_full_unstemmed The importance of temporal collocation for the evaluation of aerosol models with observations
title_sort importance of temporal collocation for the evaluation of aerosol models with observations
publisher European Geosciences Union (EGU) and Copernicus Publications
publishDate 2016
url http://hdl.handle.net/10871/31971
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-1065-2016
genre Aerosol Robotic Network
genre_facet Aerosol Robotic Network
op_relation Vol. 16, pp. 1065 - 1079
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-1065-2016
http://hdl.handle.net/10871/31971
Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics
op_rights © The Author(s). Open Access. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Attribution 3.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/), which permits non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
op_doi https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-1065-2016
container_title Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics
container_volume 16
container_issue 2
container_start_page 1065
op_container_end_page 1079
_version_ 1810448982731653120