Articles | Volume 10, issue 11
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-10-4079-2017
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-10-4079-2017
Research article
 | 
01 Nov 2017
Research article |  | 01 Nov 2017

Aerosol-type retrieval and uncertainty quantification from OMI data

Anu Kauppi, Pekka Kolmonen, Marko Laine, and Johanna Tamminen

Related authors

Bayesian uncertainty quantification in aerosol optical depth retrieval applied to TROPOMI measurements
Anu Kauppi, Antti Kukkurainen, Antti Lipponen, Marko Laine, Antti Arola, Hannakaisa Lindqvist, and Johanna Tamminen
Atmos. Meas. Tech. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-2021-328,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-2021-328, 2021
Revised manuscript not accepted
Short summary
Overview of the O3M SAF GOME-2 operational atmospheric composition and UV radiation data products and data availability
S. Hassinen, D. Balis, H. Bauer, M. Begoin, A. Delcloo, K. Eleftheratos, S. Gimeno Garcia, J. Granville, M. Grossi, N. Hao, P. Hedelt, F. Hendrick, M. Hess, K.-P. Heue, J. Hovila, H. Jønch-Sørensen, N. Kalakoski, A. Kauppi, S. Kiemle, L. Kins, M. E. Koukouli, J. Kujanpää, J.-C. Lambert, R. Lang, C. Lerot, D. Loyola, M. Pedergnana, G. Pinardi, F. Romahn, M. van Roozendael, R. Lutz, I. De Smedt, P. Stammes, W. Steinbrecht, J. Tamminen, N. Theys, L. G. Tilstra, O. N. E. Tuinder, P. Valks, C. Zerefos, W. Zimmer, and I. Zyrichidou
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 9, 383–407, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-9-383-2016,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-9-383-2016, 2016
Short summary
Comparison of GOME-2/Metop-A ozone profiles with GOMOS, OSIRIS and MLS measurements
A. Kauppi, O. N. E. Tuinder, S. Tukiainen, V. Sofieva, and J. Tamminen
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 9, 249–261, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-9-249-2016,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-9-249-2016, 2016
Short summary
Quantification of uncertainty in aerosol optical thickness retrieval arising from aerosol microphysical model and other sources, applied to Ozone Monitoring Instrument (OMI) measurements
A. Määttä, M. Laine, J. Tamminen, and J. P. Veefkind
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 7, 1185–1199, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-7-1185-2014,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-7-1185-2014, 2014

Related subject area

Subject: Aerosols | Technique: Remote Sensing | Topic: Data Processing and Information Retrieval
Transport of the Hunga volcanic aerosols inferred from Himawari-8/9 limb measurements
Fred Prata
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 3751–3764, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-3751-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-3751-2024, 2024
Short summary
A near-global multiyear climate data record of the fine-mode and coarse-mode components of atmospheric pure dust
Emmanouil Proestakis, Antonis Gkikas, Thanasis Georgiou, Anna Kampouri, Eleni Drakaki, Claire L. Ryder, Franco Marenco, Eleni Marinou, and Vassilis Amiridis
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 3625–3667, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-3625-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-3625-2024, 2024
Short summary
Innovative aerosol hygroscopic growth study from Mie–Raman–fluorescence lidar and microwave radiometer synergy
Robin Miri, Olivier Pujol, Qiaoyun Hu, Philippe Goloub, Igor Veselovskii, Thierry Podvin, and Fabrice Ducos
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 3367–3375, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-3367-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-3367-2024, 2024
Short summary
Evaluation of calibration performance of a low-cost particulate matter sensor using collocated and distant NO2
Kabseok Ko, Seokheon Cho, and Ramesh R. Rao
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 3303–3322, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-3303-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-3303-2024, 2024
Short summary
Geostationary aerosol retrievals of extreme biomass burning plumes during the 2019–2020 Australian bushfires
Daniel J. V. Robbins, Caroline A. Poulsen, Steven T. Siems, Simon R. Proud, Andrew T. Prata, Roy G. Grainger, and Adam C. Povey
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 3279–3302, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-3279-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-3279-2024, 2024
Short summary

Cited articles

Ahn, C., Torres, O., and Bhartia, P. K.: Comparison of ozone monitoring instrument UV aerosol products with Aqua/Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer and Multiangle Imaging Spectroradiometer observations in 2006, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 113, D16S27, https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JD008832, 2008.
Ahn, C., Torres, O., and Jethva, H.: Assessment of OMI near-UV aerosol optical depth over land, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 119, 2457–2473, https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JD020188, 2014.
Benedetti, A., Morcrette, J.-J., Boucher, O., Dethof, A., Engelen, R. J., Fisher, M., Flentje, H., Huneeus, N., Jones, L., Kaiser, J. W., Kinne, S., Mangold, A., Razinger, M., Simmons, A. J., and Suttie, M.: Aerosol analysis and forecast in the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts Integrated Forecast System: 2. Data assimilation, J. Geophys. Res., 114, D13205, https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JD011115, 2009.
Bovensmann, H., Burrows, J. P., Buchwitz, M., Frerick, J., Noël, S., Rozanov, V. V., Chance, K. V., and Goede, A. P. H.: SCIAMACHY: Mission objectives and measurement modes, J. Atmos. Sci., 56, 127–150, 1999.
Brynjarsdóttir, J. and O'Hagan, A.: Learning about physical parameters: the importance of model discrepancy, Inverse problems, 30, 114007, https://doi.org/10.1088/0266-5611/30/11/114007, 2014.
Download
Short summary
The paper focuses on the aerosol microphysical model selection and characterisation of uncertainty in the retrieved aerosol type and aerosol optical depth (AOD). The proposed method is based on Bayesian inference approach and can account for the model error and also include the model selection uncertainty in the total uncertainty budget. The method is applied to OMI measurements but is also applicable to other instruments. The retrieval was evaluated by comparison with ground-based measurements.