Robin Hogan Julien Delanoë Nicola Pounder University of Reading Synergistic cloud, aerosol and precipitation products Progress so far in RATEC.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Estimation of clouds in atmospheric models Tomislava Vukicevic CIRA/CSU and PAOS/CU.
Advertisements

Fast lidar & radar multiple-scattering models for cloud retrievals Robin Hogan (University of Reading) Alessandro Battaglia (University of Bonn) How can.
Robin Hogan, Julien Delanoe and Nicola Pounder University of Reading Towards unified retrievals of clouds, precipitation and aerosols.
Synergistic cloud retrievals from radar, lidar and radiometers
Radar/lidar/radiometer retrievals of ice clouds from the A-train
Lidar observations of mixed-phase clouds Robin Hogan, Anthony Illingworth, Ewan OConnor & Mukunda Dev Behera University of Reading UK Overview Enhanced.
Robin Hogan, Nicola Pounder, Chris Westbrook University of Reading, UK
Robin Hogan, Chris Westbrook University of Reading, UK Alessandro Battaglia University of Leicester, UK Fast forward modelling of radar and lidar depolarization.
Fast reverse-mode automatic differentiation using expression templates in C++ Robin Hogan University of Reading.
Ewan OConnor, Robin Hogan, Anthony Illingworth Drizzle comparisons.
1 All Rights Reserved. No part of this document may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic,
Proposed new uses for the Ceilometer Network
How to distinguish rain from hail using radar: A cunning, variational method Robin Hogan Last Minute Productions Inc.
Anthony Illingworth, + Robin Hogan, Ewan OConnor, U of Reading, UK and the CloudNET team (F, D, NL, S, Su). Reading: 19 Feb 08 – Meeting with Met office.
Robin Hogan, Nicola Pounder University of Reading, UK
Robin Hogan, University of Reading
Radar/lidar observations of boundary layer clouds
Robin Hogan, Julien Delanoë, Nicky Chalmers, Thorwald Stein, Anthony Illingworth University of Reading Evaluating and improving the representation of clouds.
Robin Hogan & Julien Delanoe
Joint ECMWF-University meeting on interpreting data from spaceborne radar and lidar: AGENDA 09:30 Introduction University of Reading activities 09:35 Robin.
Robin Hogan Julien Delanoë Nicola Pounder Chris Westbrook
Modelling radar and lidar multiple scattering Robin Hogan
Towards “unified” retrievals of cloud, precipitation and aerosol from combined radar, lidar and radiometer observations Robin Hogan, Julien Delanoë, Nicola.
Robin Hogan, Richard Allan, Nicky Chalmers, Thorwald Stein, Julien Delanoë University of Reading How accurate are the radiative properties of ice clouds.
Robin Hogan Julien Delanoe Department of Meteorology, University of Reading, UK Towards unified radar/lidar/radiometer retrievals for cloud radiation studies.
Use of ground-based radar and lidar to evaluate model clouds
Robin Hogan Julien Delanoe University of Reading Remote sensing of ice clouds from space.
Variational cloud retrievals from radar, lidar and radiometers
What can we learn about clouds and their representation in models from the synergy of radar and lidar observations? Robin Hogan, Julien Delanoë, Nicky.
Modelling radar and lidar multiple scattering Modelling radar and lidar multiple scattering Robin Hogan The CloudSat radar and the Calipso lidar were launched.
Interactive Evolutionary Computation Review of Applications Praminda Caleb-Solly Intelligent Computer Systems Centre University of the West of England.
Active Appearance Models
A Methodology for Simultaneous Retrieval of Ice and Liquid Water Cloud Properties O. Sourdeval 1, L. C.-Labonnote 2, A. J. Baran 3, G. Brogniez 2 1 – Institute.
Exploiting multiple scattering in CALIPSO measurements to retrieve liquid cloud properties Nicola Pounder, Robin Hogan, Lee Hawkness-Smith, Andrew Barrett.
Use of Kalman filters in time and frequency analysis John Davis 1st May 2011.
Depolarization lidar for water cloud remote sensing 1.Background: MS and Depolaization 2.Short overview of the MC model used in this work 3.Depol-lidar.
EarthCARE: The next step forward in global measurements of clouds, aerosols, precipitation & radiation Robin Hogan ECMWF & University of Reading With input.
1. The problem of mixed-phase clouds All models except DWD underestimate mid-level cloud –Some have separate “radiatively inactive” snow (ECMWF, DWD) –Met.
Motion Analysis (contd.) Slides are from RPI Registration Class.
CPI International UV/Vis Limb Workshop Bremen, April Development of Generalized Limb Scattering Retrieval Algorithms Jerry Lumpe & Ed Cólon.
REMOTE SENSING & THE INVERSE PROBLEM “Remote sensing is the science and art of obtaining information about an object, area, or phenomenon through the analysis.

VARSY Final Presentation ATLID-CPR-MSI Clouds, Aerosols and Precipitation “Best Estimate” Robin Hogan, Nicola Pounder, Brian Tse, Chris Westbrook University.
COST 723 Training School - Cargese October 2005 OBS 2 Radiative transfer for thermal radiation. Observations Bruno Carli.
EARLINET and Satellites: Partners for Aerosol Observations Matthias Wiegner Universität München Meteorologisches Institut (Satellites: spaceborne passive.
EarthCARE and snow Robin Hogan University of Reading.
Stochastic Monte Carlo methods for non-linear statistical inverse problems Benjamin R. Herman Department of Electrical Engineering City College of New.
A NON-RAINING 1DVAR RETRIEVAL FOR GMI DAVID DUNCAN JCSDA COLLOQUIUM 7/30/15.
1 Atmospheric Radiation – Lecture 9 PHY Lecture 10 Infrared radiation in a cloudy atmosphere: approximations.
Depolarization lidar for water cloud remote sensing 1.Background MS and MC 2.Short overview of the MC model used in this work 3.Depol-lidar for Water Cld.
Research Vignette: The TransCom3 Time-Dependent Global CO 2 Flux Inversion … and More David F. Baker NCAR 12 July 2007 David F. Baker NCAR 12 July 2007.
Retrieval of Ozone Profiles from GOME (and SCIAMACHY, and OMI, and GOME2 ) Roeland van Oss Ronald van der A and Johan de Haan, Robert Voors, Robert Spurr.
1 Optimal Channel Selection. 2 Redundancy “Information Content” vs. “On the diagnosis of the strength of the measurements in an observing system through.
Robin Hogan Ewan O’Connor The Instrument Synergy/ Target Categorization product.
An Introduction to Optimal Estimation Theory Chris O´Dell AT652 Fall 2013.
Cloud and precipitation best estimate… …and things I don’t know that I want to know Robin Hogan University of Reading.
Challenges and Strategies for Combined Active/Passive Precipitation Retrievals S. Joseph Munchak 1, W. S. Olson 1,2, M. Grecu 1,3 1: NASA Goddard Space.
Chapter 2-OPTIMIZATION G.Anuradha. Contents Derivative-based Optimization –Descent Methods –The Method of Steepest Descent –Classical Newton’s Method.
Visible optical depth,  Optically thicker clouds correlate with colder tops Ship tracks Note, retrievals done on cloudy pixels which are spatially uniform.
Satellites Storm “Since the early 1960s, virtually all areas of the atmospheric sciences have been revolutionized by the development and application of.
1 Information Content Tristan L’Ecuyer. 2 Degrees of Freedom Using the expression for the state vector that minimizes the cost function it is relatively.
A New Ocean Suite Algorithm for AMSR2 David I. Duncan September 16 th, 2015 AMSR Science Team Meeting Huntsville, AL.
UCLA Vector Radiative Transfer Models for Application to Satellite Data Assimilation K. N. Liou, S. C. Ou, Y. Takano and Q. Yue Department of Atmospheric.
12 April 2013 VARSY progress meeting Robin Hogan and Nicola Pounder (University of Reading)
UNIVERSITY OF BASILICATA CNR-IMAA (Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche Istituto di Metodologie per l’Analisi Ambientale) Tito Scalo (PZ) Analysis and interpretation.
Mesoscale Assimilation of Rain-Affected Observations Clark Amerault National Research Council Postdoctoral Associate - Naval Research Laboratory, Monterey,
Workshop on Soundings from High Spectral Resolution Infrared Observations May 6-8, 2003 University of Wisconsin-Madison.
June 20, 2005Workshop on Chemical data assimilation and data needs Data Assimilation Methods Experience from operational meteorological assimilation John.
Slide 1 Robin Hogan, APRIL-CLARA-DORSY meeting 2016 ©ECMWF Towards a fast shortwave radiance forward model for exploiting MSI measurements Robin Hogan.
Collaborative Filtering Matrix Factorization Approach
Presentation transcript:

Robin Hogan Julien Delanoë Nicola Pounder University of Reading Synergistic cloud, aerosol and precipitation products Progress so far in RATEC

Develop best estimate first Other products follow from this Synergy products as defined in CASPER

Overview of our role in RATEC Radiative transfer for EarthCARE (RATEC) –Lead contractor: Howard Barker –Started August 23, 2009 –15 month project Our role is to start the development of synergy algorithms –Also define the required imager and target classification products WP120: Review - first 3 months –Products and Algorithms Requirements Document (PARD) –Algorithm Development Plan (ADP) WP 220: Design - next 5 months –Product Definition Document (PDD) WP 320: Prototype and test - final 7 months –Algorithm Theoretical Basis Document (ATBD)

Overview of talk Laying the foundations for the algorithm... Summary of retrieval framework –State variables (describing ice, liquid, rain and aerosol) –Forward models (for radar, HSRL lidar, infrared & solar radiometers) –Cost function Minimization techniques –Gauss-Newton & Levenberg-Marquardt –Gradient Descent (adjoint method) –Ensemble methods Coding progress –C++ library –Scattering code Calculation and storage of error descriptors –Solution error covariance matrix –Averaging kernel Progress for specific atmospheric constituents –Liquid cloud: gradient constraint

Retrieval framework Ingredients developed before Not yet developed 1. New ray of data: define state vector Use classification to specify variables describing each species at each gate Ice: extinction coefficient, N 0, lidar extinction-to-backscatter ratio Liquid: extinction coefficient and number concentration Rain: rain rate and mean drop diameter Aerosol: extinction coefficient, particle size and lidar ratio 3a. Radar model Including surface return and multiple scattering 3b. Lidar model Including HSRL channels and multiple scattering 3c. Radiance model Solar and IR channels 4. Compare to observations Check for convergence 6. Iteration method Derive a new state vector 3. Forward model Not converged Converged Proceed to next ray of data 2. Convert state vector to radar-lidar resolution Often the state vector will contain a low resolution description of the profile 5. Convert Jacobian to state-vector resolution Jacobian initially will be at the radar-lidar resolution 7. Calculate retrieval error Error covariances and averaging kernel

Proposed state variables State variableRepresentation with height / constraintA-priori Ice clouds and snow Visible extinction coefficientOne variable per pixel with smoothness constraintNone Number conc. parameterCubic spline basis functions with vertical correlationTemperature dependent Lidar extinction-to-backscatter ratioCubic spline basis functions20 sr Riming factorLikely a single value per profile1 Liquid clouds Liquid water contentOne variable per pixel but with gradient constraintNone Droplet number concentrationOne value per liquid layerTemperature dependent Rain Rain rateCubic spline basis functions with flatness constraintNone Normalized number conc. N w One value per profileDependent on whether from melting ice or coallescence Melting-layer thickness scaling factorOne value per profile1 Aerosols Extinction coefficientOne variable per pixel with smoothness constraintNone Lidar extinction-to-backscatter ratioOne value per aerosol layer identifiedClimatological type depending on region Ice clouds largely done in CASPER; Snow & riming in convective clouds needs to be added (VARSY?) Liquid clouds to be tackled in RATEC Basic rain to be added in RATEC; Full representation in VARSY? Basic aerosols added in RATEC; Full representation via collaboration (IRMA?)

Forward model components From state vector x to forward modelled observations H(x)... Ice & snowLiquid cloudRainAerosol Ice/radar Liquid/radar Rain/radar Ice/lidar Liquid/lidar Rain/lidar Aerosol/lidar Ice/radiometer Liquid/radiometer Rain/radiometer Aerosol/radiometer Radar scattering profile Lidar scattering profile Radiometer scattering profile Lookup tables to obtain profiles of extinction, scattering & backscatter coefficients, asymmetry factor Sum the contributions from each constituent Gradient of radar measurements with respect to radar inputs Gradient of lidar measurements with respect to lidar inputs Gradient of radiometer measurements with respect to radiometer inputs Jacobian matrix H=y/x Lots of expensive matrix multiplications: likely to be the most expensive part of the entire algorithm x Radar forward modelled obs Lidar forward modelled obs Radiometer forward modelled obs H(x)H(x) Radiative transfer models

Solution methods (1/3) We want to minimize this cost function: Possibly using the gradient (a vector): …and the second derivative (a matrix): 1. Gauss-Newton method (Rodgers p85): –Advantage: rapid convergence (instant convergence for linear problems) –Another advantage: get the error covariance of the solution for free –Disadvantage: need the Jacobian of every forward model: can be expensive

Solution methods (2/3) 2. Gradient descent method (e.g. ECMWF data assimilation system): –Advantage: we dont need to calculate the Jacobian so forward model is cheaper! –Quasi-Newton method to get search direction (conjugate gradient, BGFS etc) –Disadvantage: more iterations needed since we dont know curvature of J(x) –Disadvantage: dont get the error for free at the end Why dont we need the Jacobian H? –The adjoint of a forward model takes as input the vector {.} and outputs the vector J obs without needing to calculate the matrix H on the way –Adjoint can be coded to be only ~3 times slower than original forward model –Tricky coding for newcomers, although some automatic code generators exist Simple steepest descent requires many steps Conjugate gradient method more intelligent…

Solution methods (3/3) 3. Levenberg-Marquardt (hybrid of Gauss-Newton & steepest descent): –If cost function reduces, keep small: rapid convergence –If cost function increases, increase so that always go downhill –More robust than Gauss-Newton, but still need the Jacobian 4. Ensemble method (e.g. Ensemble Kalman Filter): –Create ensemble of trial solutions or particles in state space –Spread of results allows Jacobian to be calculated automatically to create better set of particles: repeat until convergence –Applied to GPM retrievals by Mircea Grecu (NASA) –Advantage: no Jacobian required –Estimate of retrieval error from final spread –Disadvantage: may need many ensemble members so probably slower than adjoint method 5. Simulated annealing (e.g. Donovan in ECSIM) –Suitable for very non-linear problems –Too slow for this application?......

Computational cost can scale with number of points describing vertical profile N; we can cope with an N 2 dependence but not N 3 Radiative transfer forward models Radar/lidar modelApplicationsSpeedJacobianAdjoint Single scattering: = exp(-2 ) Radar & lidar, no multiple scatteringNN2N2 N Platts approximation = exp(-2 ) Lidar, ice only, crude multiple scatteringNN2N2 Photon Variance-Covariance (PVC) method (Hogan 2006, 2008) Lidar, ice only, small-angle multiple scattering N or N 2 N2N2 N Time-Dependent Two-Stream (TDTS) method (Hogan and Battaglia 2008) Lidar & radar, wide-angle multiple scatteringN2N2 N3N3 N2N2 Depolarization capability for TDTSLidar & radar depol with multiple scatteringN2N2 N2N2 Radiometer modelApplicationsSpeedJacobianAdjoint RTTOV (used at ECMWF & Met Office)Infrared and microwave radiancesNN Two-stream source function technique (e.g. Delanoe & Hogan 2008) Infrared radiancesNN2N2 RADIANT (from Graeme Stephens)Solar radiancesNN2N2 N Lidar will use PVC+TDTS, radar will use single scattering+TDTS Jacobian of TDTS is too expensive: need to develop reduced-resolution Jacobian or alternatively adjoint code Also need depolarization forward model with multiple scattering Infrared will probably use RTTOV, solar radiances will use RADIANT

Coding progress Coding has started on the underpinning libraries –Use C++ because of key language features Matrix and Vector Expression Library –Operator overloading and expression templates allows complex operations on matrices to be written on one line, with similar efficiency as Fortran-90 –Important feature is to allow a matrix object to behave as part of another matrix – important when different parts of the Jacobian refer to different instruments and need to be passed to functions in bits Optimal Synergy Library –Object orientation and polymorphism: Radar and Lidar classes inherit from generic Observation class; IceCloud and Aerosol inherit from generic Constituent class –Enables code to be written to be completely flexible: observations can be added and removed without needing to keep track of indices to matrices, so same code can be applied to many platforms Also written code to provide scattering libraries in NetCDF files

Storage of error descriptors Measurements Retrievals Measurements If ice is present at N points and M variables are retrieved: –MN retrieved variables to report with MN errors Error covariance and averaging kernel matrices also needed –A standard output from a variational algorithm –But ~(MN) 2 /2 values in each matrix, much larger than the retrieved variables and their errors –Matrix is a different size each ray! Need a suitable compression strategy...

Top -> Height -> bottom S N N Retrieval error covariance matrix (Extinction, lidar ratio, N)

Retrieval error correlation matrix (Extinction, lidar ratio, N) Top -> Height -> bottom S N N

For autocorrelation of extinction... 3 Gaussians requires 8N or fewer values to approximate the error covariance matrix Need to work on correlations between different variables

Height (m) Information content Averaging kernel The averaging kernel matrix expresses how the retrieval at a point depends on the truth at every other point –The sum of each column expresses how much the retrieval at that point derives from the measurements (rather than the prior): 1 is good! –The shape of each column expresses the effective vertical resolution of the retrieval: more peaked is good! Easy to parameterize: –Store integral and peak –Or store integral and the width for each column

Gradient constraint We have a good constraint on the gradient of the state variables with height for: –LWC in stratocu (adiabatic profile, particularly near cloud base) –Rain rate (fast falling so little variation with height expected) Not suitable for the usual a priori constraint Solution: add an extra term to the cost function to penalize deviations from gradient c: A. Slingo, S. Nichols and J. Schmetz, Q. J. R. Met. Soc. 1982

Example in liquid clouds Using simulated observations: –Triangular cloud observed by a 1- or 2-field-of-view lidar –Retrieval uses Levenberg-Marquardt minimization with Hogan and Battaglia (2008) model for lidar multiple scattering Optical depth=30 Footprint=100m Footprint=600m Two FOVs: very good performance One 10-m footprint: saturates at optical depth=5 One 100-m footprint: multiple scattering helps! One 10-m footprint with gradient constraint: can extrapolate downwards successfully

Ongoing work Implement various instrument forward models –Not too difficult: interfacing different codes and languages –Write adjoint for slowest models Solver –Test gradient descent algorithms (conjugate gradient, BGFS etc) Implementation of different atmospheric constituents –Ice cloud: we know how to do this –Liquid cloud: to be done in RATEC –Aerosol and precipitation: basic implementation in RATEC; longer-term development needs collaboration with DAME, IRMA etc... Test datasets –Several airborne comparisons for validation (TC4, POLARCAT etc) –A-Train –ECSIM (after RATEC) Two-instrument synergy products –To be tested using same code removing one instrument (after RATEC)

Aerosol refractive index Values from Ellie Highwood Strong dependence on aerosol type Varies with hydration Can we use one continuous variable to represent different aerosol properties? Need to make simplifications if information from multiple wavelengths is to be combined 355-nm lidar Solar MSI channels Thermal MSI channels

Matrix and Vector Expression Library Intuitive interface and ability to do complex expressions Matrix M(3,3); Vector x(3) = 1.0, 2.0, 3.0;// Simple initialization M = N * R + exp(P);// * invokes element multiplication y = transpose(x) ()* inverse(R);// ()* invokes matrix multiplication x = solve(A, b);// Linear algebra Important aspects not in any other library (to my knowledge) S.subset(M, 3, 30, 2, 20);// Matrix subsetting M(find(M < 0.0)) = 0.0;// Matlab-style indexing BitfieldMatrix b; b.bit(4) = 1;// Handling of classification data Efficient and robust implementation –Expression templates to avoid temporary objects in long expressions –Reference counting for allocated objects protects against memory leaks

Key classes State Methods: solve() add_obs(Observation) Data: List of Observations List of Constituents Vector x, y Matrix Jacobian etc. Observation Methods: calc_scat_props() virtual forward_model() Data: Real wavelength Vector y, y_error Matrix Jacobian Constituent Methods: calc_scat_props(wavelength) Data: Vector x, x_prior ActiveInstrument Methods: forward_model() Lidar Radiometer Methods: forward_model() Radar IceCloud LiquidCloud Aerosol Rain BackgroundConstituents

Forward model part 1 x ice. x liq. State vector x ln vis. ln N 0. ln vis. ln N 0 *. x highres,ice / x ice Basis functions for variables represented at reduced resolution = x highres,ice W1W1 x ice radar. radar. x radar,ice / x highres,ice x radar,ice W2W2 Scattering lookup table To radiative transfer radar. radar. 0 radar. radar. radar. radar. radar. x radar / x radar,ice = + + x radar,ice W3W3 x radar,gas x radar,liq x radar Sum the contributions from each atmospheric constituent

Forward model part 2 Z...Z... y radar / x radar Radiative transfer y' radar H radar To solver Z. '. I y' y / x H Forward modelled observations and Jacobian y radar /x ice H radar,ice y radar / x radar x radar / x radar,ice x radar,ice / x highres,ice x highres,ice / x ice W3W3 W2W2 W1W1 H radar =