Errors on SMOS retrieved SSS and their dependency to a priori wind speed X. Yin 1, J. Boutin 1, J. Vergely 2, P. Spurgeon 3, and F. Gaillard 4 1. LOCEAN.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
SMOS L2 Ocean Salinity Commissioning Plan, 07/05/2009 Level 2 Ocean Salinity Processor Commissioning Plan 7 May 2009 ARGANS ACRI-ST ICM-CSIC.
Advertisements

SMOS L2 Ocean Salinity – Reprocessing Level 2 Ocean Salinity Reprocessing 17 September 2008.
SMOS L2 Ocean Salinity L1OP v620 border flag width 23 May 2014 ARGANS & L2OS ESL
SMOS L2 Ocean Salinity Reprocessed constant calibration L1c OTT drift study 13 April 2011 ARGANS & L2OS ESL ascendingdescending.
1 © ACRI-ST, all rights reserved – 2012 Galactic noise model adjustment Jean-Luc Vergely (ACRI-ST) Jacqueline Boutin (LOCEAN) Xiaobin Yin (LOCEAN)
SMOS – in situ comparisons J. Boutin*, N. Martin*, O. Hernandez*, N. Reul , G. Reverdin* *LOCEAN,  IFREMER.
SMOS L2 Ocean Salinity L2OS RFI study 9 May 2011 ARGANS & L2OS ESL.
OSE meeting GODAE, Toulouse 4-5 June 2009 Interest of assimilating future Sea Surface Salinity measurements.
SMOS L1v620-L2v613 versus L1v505- L2v550 validation May 2011 Nicolas Martin, Jacqueline Boutin LOCEAN 26 May 2014.
SMOS L2 Ocean Salinity Level 2 Ocean Salinity L1 -> L2OS tools 12 February 2014 ARGANS & SMOS L2OS ESL.
SMOS L2 Ocean Salinity Level 2 Ocean Salinity Using TEC estimated from Stokes 3 24 October 2012 ACRI-st, LOCEAN & ARGANS SMOS+polarimetry.
1 © ACRI-ST, all rights reserved – 2012 TEC estimation Jean-Luc Vergely (ACRI-ST) Jacqueline Boutin (LOCEAN)
MIRAS performance based on OS data SMOS MIRAS IOP 6 th Review, ESAC – 17 June 2013 Prepared by: J. Font, SMOS Co-Lead Investigator, Ocean Salinity – ICM-CSIC.
1 Boutin et al., Avril 2015, SMOS-OCEAN TOSCA SMOS Salinity anomalies – Towards the correction of SMOS SSS systematic biases - J. Boutin 1, N. Martin 1,
1 Boutin et al., 2014 SMOS Salinity anomalies: new insights into SMOS capability at sensing SSS variability and into the improvements to be made in the.
SMOS L2 Ocean Salinity – PM#25 1/20 Level 2 Ocean Salinity May 2013 v600 status v610 planning & schedule Slim-line UDP & improved.
Sea water dielectric constant, temperature and remote sensing of Sea Surface Salinity E. P. Dinnat 1,2, D. M. Le Vine 1, J. Boutin 3, X. Yin 3, 1 Cryospheric.
1.STSE 2.Objectives of today 3.Data availability 4.Reprocessing 5.RFI 6.Conferences & user meetings Introduction – SMOS mission status.
About L2OS v6 improvement wrt L2OS v5 N. Martin – J.L. Vergely - J. Boutin Descending orbits results In L2 v6 => latitudinal biases are reduced wrt L2.
SMOS L2 Ocean Salinity Level 2 Ocean Salinity status 4 February 2013 ARGANS.
Ifremer Planning of Cal/Val Activities during In orbit commisioning Phase N. Reul, J. Tenerelli, S. Brachet, F. Paul & F. Gaillard, ESL & GLOSCAL teams.
SMOS L2 Ocean Salinity – PM#25 1/20 Level 2 Ocean Salinity May 2013 OTT post-processor.
Galactic noise model adjustment Jean-Luc Vergely (ACRI-ST) Jacqueline Boutin (LOCEAN) Xiaobin Yin (LOCEAN)
SMOS QWG-5, 30 May- 1 June 2011, ESRIN Ocean Salinity 1 1.Commissioning reprocessing analysis 2.New processor version: improvements and problems detected/solved.
Progress Meeting #27, April 2015, Barcelona SPAIN T3.2 Retrieval algorithm Estrella Olmedo BEC team SMOS Barcelona Expert Centre Pg. Marítim de la.
SMOS SSS and wind speed J. Boutin, X. Yin, N. Martin -Optimization of roughness/foam model -Comparison of new-old ECMWF wind speeds -SSS anomaly in the.
SMOS L2 Ocean Salinity Level 2 Ocean Salinity PM # May 2011 ARGANS & L2OS CLS.
Satellite Sea-surface Salinity: Data and Product Biases and Differences Eric Bayler and Li Ren NOAA/NESDIS Center for Satellite Applications and Research.
A. Montuori 1, M. Portabella 2, S. Guimbard 2, C. Gabarrò 2, M. Migliaccio 1 1 Dipartimento per le Tecnologie (DiT), University of Naples Parthenope, Italy.
SMOS L2 Ocean Salinity Level 2 Ocean Salinity PM # November 2010 ARGANS & L2OS LOCEAN, Paris.
SMOS QWG-11, ESRIN 4-5 July 2013 L2OS v600 status and evolution 1 The SMOS L2 OS Team.
SMOS L2 Ocean Salinity Level 2 Ocean Salinity Status 9 February 2015 ARGANS & SMOS L2OS ESL 1.
SMOS L2 Ocean Salinity Level 2 Ocean Salinity L2OS planning 2 July 2014 ARGANS & SMOS L2OS ESL 1.
Dependence of SMOS/MIRAS brightness temperatures on wind speed and foam model Xiaobin Yin, Jacqueline Boutin LOCEAN & ARGANS.
EXTENDING THE LAND SEA CONTAMINATION CHARACTERIZATION TO THE EXTENDED ALIAS- FREE FIELD OF VIEW Joe Tenerelli (CLS) and Nicolas Reul (IFREMER) SMOS Quality.
Optimization of L-band sea surface emissivity models deduced from SMOS data X. Yin (1), J. Boutin (1), N. Martin (1), P. Spurgeon (2) (1) LOCEAN, Paris,
Introduction Martin et al. JGR, 2014 CAROLS airborne Tbs indicate slightly lower wind influence than predicted by model 1 at high WS In model 1 previous.
QWG-12 Ocean studies (v5 reprocessed SSS) -South Pacific Maximum Salinity -North Atlantic Maximum Salinity (SPURS) -Variability of SSS: effects of rain/roughness/interpolation.
Space Reflecto, November 4 th -5 th 2013, Plouzané Characterization of scattered celestial signals in SMOS observations over the Ocean J. Gourrion 1, J.
SMOS L2 Ocean Salinity Level 2 Ocean Salinity v63x product design evolution 22 April 2015 ARGANS & SMOS L2OS ESL 1.
Sea Surface Salinity as Measured by SMOS and by Surface Autonomous Drifters: Impact of Rain J. Boutin, N. Martin, X. Yin, G. Reverdin, S. Morrisset LOCEAN,
Sea Surface Salinity under rain cells: SMOS satellite and in-situ drifters observations J. Boutin 1, N. Martin 1, G. Reverdin 1,S. Morisset 1, X. Yin 1,
USING SMOS POLARIMETRIC BRIGHTNESS TEMPERATURES TO CORRECT FOR ROUGH SURFACE EMISSION BEFORE SALINITY INVERSION.
SMOS-BEC – Barcelona (Spain) LO calibration frequency impact Part II C. Gabarró, J. Martínez, V. González, A. Turiel & BEC team SMOS Barcelona Expert Centre.
SMOS-BEC – Barcelona (Spain) Assessment of impact of new ECMWF cycle 38r2 BEC team SMOS Barcelona Expert Centre Pg. Marítim de la Barceloneta 37-49, Barcelona.
QWG-10 ESRIN 4-6 February 2013 Quality control study for SMOS data / Flags analysis C. Gabarró, J. Martínez, E. Olmedo M. Portabella, J. Font and BEC team.
QWG8, Boutin et al. SMOS and Aquarius: SSS and Wind Effect J. Boutin, X. Yin, N. Martin (LOCEAN, Paris), E. Dinnat (Chapman University/NASA/GSFC), S. Yueh.
Simulator Wish-List Gary Lagerloef Aquarius Principal Investigator Cal/Val/Algorithm Workshop March GSFC.
Estimating SMOS error structure using triple collocation Delphine Leroux, CESBIO, France Yann Kerr, CESBIO, France Philippe Richaume, CESBIO, France 1.
SMOS Quality Working Group Meeting #2 Frascati (Rome), September 13 th -14 th,2010 SMOS-BEC Team.
SMOS QWG-9, ESRIN October 2012 L2OS: Product performance summary v550 highlights 1 The SMOS L2 OS Team.
New model used existing formulation for foam coverage and foam emissivity; tested over 3 half orbits in the Pacific foam coverage exponent modified to.
Sea Surface Salinity under rain cells: SMOS satellite and in-situ drifters observations J. Boutin 1, N. Martin 1, G. Reverdin 1,S. Morisset 1, X. Yin 1,
T. Meissner and F. Wentz Remote Sensing Systems 2014 Aquarius / SAC-D Science Team Meeting November , 2014 Seattle. Washington,
A high-resolution Aquarius OI SSS L4 analysis: 3-year, near-global, weekly, 0.5 degree grid Oleg Melnichenko, Peter Hacker, Nikolai Maximenko, and James.
SMOS-BEC – Barcelona (Spain) Variable LO freq. Cal. analysis LO at 2min from to BEC team SMOS Barcelona Expert Centre Pg. Marítim de.
21-23/04/2015PM27 J-L Vergely, J. Boutin, N. Kolodziejczyk, N. Martin, S. Marchand SMOS RFI/Outlier filtering.
SMOS L2 Ocean Salinity – PM#25 1/20 Level 2 Ocean Salinity May 2013 A3TEC.
SMOS Science Meeting September 2011 Arles, FR Simulating Aquarius by Resampling SMOS Gary Lagerloef, Yann Kerr & Eric Anterrieu and Initial Results.
Impact of sea surface roughness on SMOS measurements A new empirical model S. Guimbard & SMOS-BEC Team SMOS Barcelona Expert Centre Pg. Marítim de la Barceloneta.
SMOS L2 Ocean Salinity Level 2 Ocean Salinity L2OS v611 status 12 February 2014 ARGANS & SMOS L2OS ESL.
Dependence of SMOS/MIRAS brightness temperatures on wind speed: sea surface effect and latitudinal biases Xiaobin Yin, Jacqueline Boutin LOCEAN.
QWG10, Boutin & Hernandez Large scale SSS inter-annual variability in tropical Indian and Pacific Oceans J. Boutin 1, O. Hernandez 1, N. Martin 1, G. Reverdin.
21-23/04/2015PM27 ACRI-ST ARGANS LOCEAN TEC follow-up.
Tests on V500 Sun On versus Sun Off 1)Tbmeas. –Tbmodel in the FOV X. Yin, J. Boutin Inputs from R. Balague, P. Spurgeon, A. Chuprin, M. Martin-Neira and.
Roughness Correction for Aquarius (AQ) Sea Surface Salinity (SSS) Algorithm using MicroWave Radiometer (MWR) W. Linwood Jones, Yazan Hejazin Central FL.
Aquarius SSS space/time biases with respect to Argo data
‘Aquarius’ Maps Ocean Salinity Fine-scale Structure
NOAA Objective Sea Surface Salinity Analysis P. Xie, Y. Xue, and A
Attribution and impacts of upper ocean biases in CCSM3 W. G
Presentation transcript:

Errors on SMOS retrieved SSS and their dependency to a priori wind speed X. Yin 1, J. Boutin 1, J. Vergely 2, P. Spurgeon 3, and F. Gaillard 4 1. LOCEAN 2. ACRI 3. ARGANS 4. IFREMER 1

SMOS SSS map using ISAS optimum interpolation 1. SSS from L2OS v5.5 reprocessing, August 2010 (“SSS OP ”) 2. In Situ Analysis System (ISAS) SSS 2

Why do we need a better estimation of wind speed? 1. ECMWF WS as prior and fixed σ WS = 0m/s 2. ECMWF WS as prior and tuned σ WS = 2m/s (L2OS OP) 3. SSMI WS as prior and tuned σ WS = 2m/s 3

Why do we need a better estimation of wind speed? ECMWF WS v38r2 – v37r2 1m/s -1m/s Retrieved WS1 v38r2 – v37r2 1m/s -1m/s The differences between two versions of ECMWF are partially but not totally reduced by the L2OS retrievals. The difference between two versions of retrieved WS and that of SSS are well collocated, and the correlation coefficient between the two is Errors in ECMWF WS can lead to errors in SSS, since retrieved WS can not reduce the errors in WS a priori totally with the L2OS retrieval scheme. Retrieved SSS1 v38r2 – v37r2 0.2psu -0.2psu 4

The retrievals are based on the Levenberg and Marquardt iterative convergence method. The first guessed geophysical inputs (SSS, SST, WS and TEC) are adjusted so as to minimize a so called “cost function” χ 2 expressed by Introduction Can we reduce the biases in retrieved wind speed, if 1)Relax the error on a priori WS ( σ WS ) : 2m/s -> 5m/s (“OP, 5m/s”) 2)Two step scheme. 5

Introduction Two step scheme, objective: to reduce the biases in the retrieved SSS and WS without increasing noise in the SSS retrievals. 1)1 st step: a priori ECWMF WS with increasing error of a priori WS ( σ WS ) to 5m/s -> retrieved WS -> 2D spatial median filtering (50 km radius close to SMOS resolution) -> smoothed WS Objective: to relax the dependency of error/bias in retrieved WS to a priori estimate (ECMWF), and to reduce noise in retrieved WS used as a priori estimate for the next step. 2) 2 st step: smoothed WS from 1 st step (instead of ECMWF) used as a priori estimate with ( σ WS ) set back to be 2 m/s -> retrieved SSS and WS Note: for both steps, errors of a priori SSS, SST and TEC are the same as in the operational L2OS processor, i.e. 100psu, 1 °C and 10 tecu. 6

ECMWF WS SSMI WS SMOS operational retrieved WS Radiometer wind speeds lower than ECMWF WS in the eastern equatorial pacific ocean because of strong surface currents, but still higher than SSMI WS -> positive anomalies in retrieved SSS compared with ISAS SSS rSSS - ISAS 1. One ascending orbit in April 2013, with two versions of ECMWF WS(v38r2 and v37r2) uses as a priori estimate. Can the retrieved WS and SSS converge, with two different versions of a priori WS? 2. One ascending orbit in Aug, 2010 in the eastern equatorial pacific ocean, where we found large WS biases between ECWMF and SSMI. Comparisons among SMOS retrieved WS, ECWMF WS and SSMI WS, and comparisons of SSS. 3. All ascending orbits in Aug. 2010: performance over the global ocean Data 7

Results Can the retrieved WS converge to the same value with the two step scheme, using two different versions of a priori ECMWF WS? YES with some exceptions! Operational, rWS1 v38r2 – v37r2 1m/s -1m/s Two step, rWS1 v38r2 – v37r2 1m/s -1m/s Exceptions: 1) too large differences between two a priori WS; or 2) RFI 8

Results Exceptions: 1) too large differences between two a priori WS; 2) RFI 0.2psu -0.2psu 0.2psu -0.2psu Operational, rSSS1 v38r2 – v37r2 Two step, rSSS1 v38r2 – v37r2 Can the retrieved SSS converge to the same value with the two step scheme, using two different versions of a priori ECMWF WS? YES with some exceptions! 9

TEST: comparisons of different methods 3S-2N Wind speed Salinity 10

Monthly maps of std of SSS for each 0.5 * 0.5 grid Operational SSS Two-step SSS With mask: abs(diff) > 0.2 No mask Two-step scheme enhances problems near the coastal and RFI regions. diff 11

Monthly maps in August 2010 No mask With mask 12

Monthly maps in August 2010 Std of SSS is higher if we only increase error on a priori WS. Differences in SSS Differences in std of SSS 13

rWS OP - WS ECMWF rWS twostep - WS ECMWF retrieved WS Problems near the coastal and RFI regions 14

Conclusions 1.The two step scheme enhances the capability of retrieving WS using multi-angular MIRAS TB. 2.The retrieved SSS and WS converge to the same value with the two step scheme, regardless of different versions of ECMWF WS used as a priori estimates. 3.The retrieved WS with the two step scheme are closer to SSMI WS in Eastern Equatorial Pacific than the L2OS OP WS. 4.The retrieved SSS with the two step scheme are closer to in-situ SSS in Eastern Equatorial Pacific than the L2OS OP SSS. 5.Compared with L2OS OP retrievals, the two step scheme does not increase the noise in retrieved SSS in the open ocean at low and moderate latitude. 6.The two step scheme enhances problems near the coastal and RFI contaminated regions. 15

TEST: comparisons of different methods Latitude: 3S-2N rSSS – ISAS (psu)rWS – SSMI (m/s) Mean(median)stdMean(median)std L2OS OP (2m/s) 0.48(0.33) (1.18)1.37 Two step 0.26(0.20) (-0.03)1.90 No WS Smoothing 0.33(0.27) (-0.09)2.57 L2OS OP (5m/s): 1 st step 0.38(0.31) (0.24)2.24 Tests (one orbit in 2010/08/06,13h- 14h ): 1)L2OS, σ WS = 2 m/s 2)Two step: 1) σ WS = 5 m/s + WS smoothing; 2) σ WS = 2 m/s 3)Two step: 1) σ WS = 5m/s + no WS smoothing; 2) σ WS = 2 m/s 4)L2 OS, σ WS = 5 m/s 3S-2N 16

Monthly SSS3 maps in August 2010 No mask 17

Variances of retrieved parameters 18