<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" xml:lang="en" dtd-version="3.0"><?xmltex \makeatother\@nolinetrue\makeatletter?>
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">AMT</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Atmospheric Measurement Techniques</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">AMT</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Atmos. Meas. Tech.</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">1867-8548</issn><publisher>
    <publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
    <publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
  </publisher></journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/amt-11-2427-2018</article-id><title-group><article-title>Analysis of ionospheric structure influences on residual <?xmltex \hack{\break}?>ionospheric errors
in GNSS radio occultation bending<?xmltex \hack{\break}?> angles based on ray tracing simulations</article-title><alt-title>Analysis of ionospheric structure influences</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Analysis of ionospheric structure influences}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{C. Liu et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1 aff3">
          <name><surname>Liu</surname><given-names>Congliang</given-names></name>
          <email>liucongliang1985@gmail.com</email>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2 aff3 aff1 aff5">
          <name><surname>Kirchengast</surname><given-names>Gottfried</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9187-937X</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff3 aff4">
          <name><surname>Sun</surname><given-names>Yueqiang</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff5 aff6">
          <name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>Kefei</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9376-1148</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff5">
          <name><surname>Norman</surname><given-names>Robert</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2 aff3">
          <name><surname>Schwaerz</surname><given-names>Marc</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff3 aff4">
          <name><surname>Bai</surname><given-names>Weihua</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff3">
          <name><surname>Du</surname><given-names>Qifei</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff7">
          <name><surname>Li</surname><given-names>Ying</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>Beijing Key Laboratory of Space Environment Exploration, National Space
Science Center, <?xmltex \hack{\break}?>Chinese Academy of Sciences (NSSC/CAS), Beijing, China</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>Wegener Center for Climate and Global Change (WEGC) and Institute for
Geophysics, Astrophysics, <?xmltex \hack{\break}?>and Meteorology/Institute of Physics, University
of Graz, Graz, Austria</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution>Joint Laboratory on Occultations for Atmosphere and Climate (JLOAC) of
NSSC/CAS, Beijing, China, <?xmltex \hack{\break}?>and University of Graz, Graz, Austria</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff4"><label>4</label><institution>University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff5"><label>5</label><institution>SPACE Research Centre, RMIT University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff6"><label>6</label><institution>School of Environment of Science and Spatial Informatics, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou, China</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff7"><label>7</label><institution>Institute of Geodesy and Geophysics (IGG), Chinese Academy of Sciences,
Wuhan, China</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Congliang Liu (liucongliang1985@gmail.com)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>26</day><month>April</month><year>2018</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>11</volume>
      <issue>4</issue>
      <fpage>2427</fpage><lpage>2440</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>16</day><month>July</month><year>2017</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>31</day><month>August</month><year>2017</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>28</day><month>February</month><year>2018</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>9</day><month>March</month><year>2018</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2018 Congliang Liu et al.</copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2018</copyright-year>
      <license license-type="open-access"><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link></license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/11/2427/2018/amt-11-2427-2018.html">This article is available from https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/11/2427/2018/amt-11-2427-2018.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/11/2427/2018/amt-11-2427-2018.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/11/2427/2018/amt-11-2427-2018.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract><title>Abstract</title>
    <p id="d1e205">The Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) radio occultation (RO)
technique is widely used to observe the atmosphere for applications such as
numerical weather prediction and global climate monitoring. The ionosphere is
a major error source to RO at upper stratospheric altitudes, and a linear
dual-frequency bending angle correction is commonly used to remove the
first-order ionospheric effect. However, the higher-order residual
ionospheric error (RIE) can still be significant, so it needs to be
further mitigated for high-accuracy applications, especially from 35 km
altitude upward, where the RIE is most relevant compared to the decreasing
magnitude of the atmospheric bending angle. In a previous study we quantified
RIEs using an ensemble of about 700 quasi-realistic end-to-end simulated RO
events, finding typical RIEs at the 0.1 to 0.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>rad noise level, but
were left with 26 exceptional events with anomalous RIEs at the 1 to 10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>rad level that remained unexplained. In this study, we focused on
investigating the causes of the high RIE of these exceptional events,
employing detailed along-ray-path analyses of atmospheric and ionospheric
refractivities, impact parameter changes, and bending angles and RIEs under
asymmetric and symmetric ionospheric structures. We found that the main
causes of the high RIEs are a combination of physics-based effects – where
asymmetric ionospheric conditions play the primary role, more than the
ionization level driven by solar activity – and technical ray tracer effects
due to occasions of imperfect smoothness in ionospheric refractivity model
derivatives. We also found that along-ray impact parameter variations of more
than 10 to 20 m are possible due to ionospheric asymmetries and,
depending on prevailing horizontal refractivity gradients, are positive or
negative relative to the initial impact parameter at the GNSS transmitter.
Furthermore, mesospheric RIEs are found generally higher than
upper-stratospheric ones, likely due to being closer in tangent point heights to
the ionospheric <inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:mi>E</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> layer peaking near 105 km, which increases RIE
vulnerability. In the future we will further improve the along-ray modeling
system to fully isolate technical from physics-based effects and to use it
beyond this work for additional GNSS RO signal propagation studies.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<?pagebreak page2428?><sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e238">Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) radio occultation (RO; Melbourne et al., 1994; Kursinski et al., 1997; Hajj et al., 2002) is a
relatively new atmospheric sounding technique. It can deliver data traceable
to the international standard of time (the SI second) and has a demonstrated
capacity for monitoring decadal-scale climate change in the free atmosphere
(Steiner et al., 2009, 2011, 2013; Anthes, 2011; Foelsche et al., 2011;
Lackner et al., 2011; Ho et al., 2012; Angerer et al., 2017). This capacity
rests on RO's unique combination of characteristics such as high vertical
resolution, high accuracy, long-term stability, and global coverage (Kursinski
et al., 1997; Scherllin-Pirscher et al., 2011; Anthes, 2011; Steiner et al., 2011). Figure 1 illustrates the
GNSS RO geometry that constitutes the basis of the RO technique. The focus is
to schematically show essential aspects relevant to this study on along-ray
ionospheric influences on RO bending angles, which deepens insight on top of
our recent Liu et al. (2015) study.</p>
      <p id="d1e241">Ionospheric error is significant in GNSS RO observations (e.g., Kursinski et
al., 1997; Mannucci et al., 2011; Liu et al., 2013), and a dual-frequency
linear combination of RO bending angles is usually implemented to correct
for the first-order ionospheric effect (Vorob'ev and Krasil'nikova, 1994;
Ladreiter and Kirchengast, 1996). However, the higher-order residual
ionospheric error (RIE) after this correction is still not negligible for
high-accuracy applications such as RO-based climate change monitoring
(Steiner et al., 2011, 2013). This applies especially above about 35 km
altitude, where the RIE becomes increasingly relevant compared to the
exponentially decreasing magnitude of the neutral atmospheric bending angle
(Syndergaard, 2000; Mannucci et al., 2011; Danzer et al., 2013, 2015; Liu et
al., 2013, 2015; Healy and Culverwell, 2015).</p>
      <p id="d1e244">Moreover, the RIE can propagate downwards into the lower-stratospheric
retrievals of refractivity and temperature through the Abel integral and the
hydrostatic integral (Kursinski et al., 1997; Gobiet and Kirchengast, 2004;
Steiner and Kirchengast, 2005; Gobiet et al., 2007). It is therefore
essential to better understand and further mitigate the RIE in order to
enable benchmark-quality stratospheric RO retrievals.</p>
      <p id="d1e247">A wide array of studies related to a better understanding of higher-order
ionospheric errors in GNSS RO data have been conducted already by a range of
scientists (Bassiri and Hajj, 1993; Vorob'ev and Krasil'nikova, 1994;
Ladreiter and Kirchengast, 1996; Syndergaard, 2000; Gorbunov, 2002; Hoque
and Jakowski, 2010, 2011; Mannucci et al., 2011; Danzer et al., 2013, 2015;
Healy and Culverwell, 2015; Coleman and Forte, 2017). A few of these also
suggested ways of correcting higher-order RIEs in RO bending angles
(Syndergaard, 2000; Danzer et al., 2013; Healy and Culverwell, 2015), which
may be applied on top of the standard dual-frequency correction introduced
by Vorob'ev and Krasil'nikova (1994).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1"><label>Figure 1</label><caption><p id="d1e253">Radio occultation geometry between GNSS transmitter and
low Earth orbit (LEO) receiver satellites, schematically illustrating the
separate L1 and L2 signal ray paths and the ionosphere-corrected (Lc) ray
path through the atmosphere–ionosphere system. Key quantities additionally
indicated are the (total accumulated) bending angle <inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, the
(spherically symmetric) ray impact parameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, and the radius <inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> from the
Earth's center of curvature to the tangent point of the Lc signal path
(modified from Liu et al., 2015).</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=227.622047pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/11/2427/2018/amt-11-2427-2018-f01.jpg"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e283">The convenient formulation introduced by Healy and Culverwell (2015), which
adds a fairly simple higher-order squared-bending-angle difference term to
the standard correction, is meanwhile applied in operational processing of
the data from the European MetOp (Meteorological Operational Satellites) RO
mission (Luntama et al., 2008; Christian Marquardt, EUMETSAT Darmstadt, personal
communications, 2017). Recently, Angling et al. (2018) further improved the
empirical modeling of the “kappa coefficient” in this formulation, by
accounting for solar zenith angle, solar flux (F10.7 index), and altitude
dependencies.</p>
      <p id="d1e286">In our work over the recent years we have assessed the variation of bending
angle RIEs (biases and standard deviations) with solar activity, with latitudinal
region, and with or without the assumption of ionospheric spherical symmetry
and of co-existing RO observing system errors, using end-to-end simulations
for single RO events (Liu et al., 2013) and a full-day ensemble of RO events
(Liu et al., 2015). As shown in these explanatory simulation studies, in
overall agreement with the empirical study of Danzer et al. (2013), the RIE
biases have a clear negative tendency and a bias magnitude increasing with
solar activity, as well as being affected by deviations from ionospheric
spherical symmetry (Mannucci et al., 2010) where increasing asymmetries also
tend to increase the biases.</p>
      <p id="d1e289">What remained unexplored in our Liu et al. (2015) study and had also not yet
been explored elsewhere – but is critical to be understood for further
improvement of the existing<?pagebreak page2429?> RIE corrections that apply spherical symmetry
(Syndergaard, 2000; Healy and Culvervell, 2015; Angling et al., 2018) – is
the influences of the three-dimensional and asymmetric ionospheric
structures along the GNSS-to-LEO (low Earth orbit) signal paths on the RIE, in particular the
conditions that may lead to anomalously high RIEs.</p>
      <p id="d1e292">A first step in this direction, though not focusing on bending angle RIEs,
was the study by Mannucci et al. (2011), which found that under ionospheric
storm conditions anomalous effects can be significant. Recently also Coleman
and Forte (2017) reported RIE investigations for asymmetry conditions,
including on the effect of traveling ionospheric disturbances upon the RIE.
Another step was the somewhat puzzling side result in our Liu et al. (2015)
study that the end-to-end simulations of an ensemble of about 700 RO events
produced about two dozen RIE outlier profiles. The basis was 3-D ray tracing
simulations, where the ionospheric model NeUoG (University of Graz electron density model; Leitinger and Kirchengast,
1997) was used as a quasi-realistic model for large-scale 3-D ionospheric
structures, together with the atmospheric model MSIS-90 (Mass Spectrometer and Incoherent Scatter neutral atmosphere model 1990; Hedin, 1991) for
simple but representative neutral atmosphere reference conditions. More
precisely, the RIE standard deviation of 26 profiles from the simulations
exceeded a threshold value of 7 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>rad within the upper stratosphere
and mesosphere. These were therefore rejected from the ensemble statistics
results reported by Liu et al. (2015).</p>
      <p id="d1e303">In this study we now place focus on these 26 exceptional profiles and, by way
of detailed along-ray analyses of ray tracing simulations, aim to shed
light on the causes of anomalously high RIEs, with the additional goal of
deepening quantitative insight into how RIEs accumulate during signal propagation,
along with accumulation of the total (atmospheric) bending angles that are
the desired RO observables. In Sect. 2, the exceptional RO events and the
simulation setup for exploring their bending angle RIEs are introduced.
Section 3 provides the results, which we mainly discuss through detailed
inspection of example events. A summary and conclusions are finally given in
Sect. 4.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <title>Exceptional RO events and investigation methodology</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <title>Exceptional RO events</title>
      <p id="d1e317">The ensemble of RO events used by Liu et al. (2015) was simulated for 15
July 2008, adopting the European MetOp RO mission as an example low Earth
orbiter (Edwards and Pawlak, 2000), specifically thinking of MetOp-A, which
was launched as the first of the MetOp series in late 2006 (Luntama et al.,
2008). Each MetOp satellite is a sun-synchronous LEO satellite at about 820 km with the Global Positioning System (GPS) Receiver for Atmospheric
Sounding (GRAS) on board (Loiselet et al., 2000), which acquires about 700 RO
events per day (Luntama et al., 2008).</p>
      <p id="d1e320">Using, as summarized above, simple spherically symmetric neutral atmospheric
modeling (by MSIS-90) combined with 3-D ionospheric modeling (by NeUoG), we
simulated in that study the ensemble of daily RO events for 14 different
end-to-end simulation cases. These included without-ionosphere (wi) cases as
well as spherical symmetry (ss) and non-spherical-symmetry (ns) ionospheric
cases for low, medium, and high solar activity levels, under the assumption
of either perfect observing system (op) with no errors or realistic
observing system (or) with MetOp-type errors; for details see Liu et al. (2015), Table 2 and Sect. 2.3 therein. The total number of the simulated RO
events found for the day was 723, of which 26 exceptionally noisy ones were
classified as outliers (estimated bending angle RIE exceeding 7 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>rad
somewhere within 30 to 80 km). These 26 events are investigated closer in
this study.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 2</label><caption><p id="d1e333">Distribution of the mean tangent point locations of the
723 RO events simulated by Liu et al. (2015) for 15 July 2008 <bold>(a)</bold>,
including 697 events with standard RIE (small-white triangles) and 26 events
with exceptional RIE (red triangles; upward-pointing, rising events;
downward-pointing, setting events). The latter 26 events mainly reside in
the European–Asian cluster (EAC; magenta box) and Indian Ocean cluster (IOC;
green box). The background color map illustrates the
vertically integrated total electron content (vTEC) of the NeUoG ionospheric
model for medium solar activity (for 12:00 UTC of 15 July; F10.7 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 140; shown in TEC units, 1 TECU <inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 10<inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">16</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> electrons m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The
bottom panels depict the RIEs for a perfect observing system (op) with no
observational errors and non-spherical (opns) <bold>(b)</bold> as well as
spherically symmetric (opss) <bold>(c)</bold> ionospheric conditions. They show
the bending angle RIE bias (symbols) and standard deviation (error bars)
estimates for the 30–80 km range for low (F10.7 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 70, green), medium
(F10.7 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 140, blue), and high (F10.7 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 210, red) solar activity, for
each of the 26 exceptional events (ordered by clusters, with those not
falling into EAC and IOC marked as OTHERS), with each one identified by its
chronological RO event number of the day.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=483.69685pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/11/2427/2018/amt-11-2427-2018-f02.jpg"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e411">Figure 2a shows the global distribution of mean tangent point (TP) locations of
all 723 events (as small triangles) and highlights the locations of the 26 exceptional events (as red triangles).
The majority of the latter (18 of the 26) appear to cluster over the European–Asian and Indian Ocean regions
(EAC and IOC, highlighted as boxes); the remaining eight events are distributed
more diversely in other extratropical locations, mainly in the Northern
Hemisphere. Figure 2b and c depict the RIE bias and standard deviation,
defined in the same way as by Liu et al. (2013), which are estimated for the
upper stratosphere and mesosphere (30–80 km) for the 26 events, for the
non-spherical-symmetry (“opns”) and spherical symmetry (“opss”)
ionospheric conditions, respectively. Intercomparing Fig. 2b and c shows
that the main driver of anomalously high RIEs is asymmetric ionospheric
conditions and possibly residual error effects from ray tracing through the
3-D ionosphere, since only few events (6 of the 26) exhibit large RIE
standard deviations (exceeding 1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>rad) even in the case of symmetric
ionospheric conditions.</p>
      <p id="d1e423">Related to the clusters, one can see that, in the opss case, almost all
noisy exceptional events occurred in the IOC, while in the opns case the
noisiest ones occurred in both the EAC and IOC. Related to solar activity, one
can see that in both the opss and opns cases higher ionization
(F10.7) levels generally lead to increased RIEs, compared to lowest
ionization (F10.7 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 70), but the picture is ambiguous, and often
medium solar activity also leads to higher RIEs than high solar activity.</p>
      <p id="d1e433">These overall characteristics revealed by Fig. 2 point, in particular, to
two facts that shall guide our detailed investigation for better
understanding of anomalous RIEs: (1) asymmetric ionospheric conditions play
a key role, more than ionization levels and possible geographic location
dependencies (e.g., via solar or geomagnetic influences), and so inspection
of the along-ray signal dynamics is essential; (2) the several exceptions
from the overall characteristics, and some geographic clustering that has no
obvious physics-based<?pagebreak page2430?> explanation, indicate that there is no single clear
cause for the anomalous RIEs and that some perturbations also come in from
the technical challenge of smooth ray tracing at millimetric excess-phase
accuracy through 3-D ionospheric models like NeUoG.</p>
      <p id="d1e436">We inspected the bending angle RIE profiles of the 26 events over the 20 to
80 km height range, including also their underlying excess-phase RIE
profiles, and chose three representative events that we will explore in
detail below for improving RIE insight: an extremely noisy event (Occ.530
from the EAC) and a medium noisy event (Occ.20 from the IOC) from the 26
exceptional events, both used at medium solar activity, and a reference
event from the 697 standard events, with low-noise RIE (Occ.25). Table 1
summarizes the main parameters for these three events, and Fig. 3
illustrates them in terms of excess phases, bending angles, and the
associated RIEs.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 3</label><caption><p id="d1e441">Illustration of the three example events chosen for
detailed inspection (Occ.530, red; Occ.20, green; Occ.25, blue), showing
their excess-phase profiles <bold>(a)</bold>, excess-phase RIE profiles <bold>(b)</bold>, bending angle profiles <bold>(c)</bold>, and bending angle RIE
profiles <bold>(d)</bold> over the impact height range 40 to 80 km for medium solar activity (F10.7 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 140) and non-spherical-symmetry (ns)
ionosphere conditions. The excess-phase and bending angle profiles are shown
for both GPS frequencies L1 (dashed) and L2 (dashed-dotted) as well as after
standard first-order ionospheric correction (subscript c; solid).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/11/2427/2018/amt-11-2427-2018-f03.png"/>

        </fig>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1" specific-use="star"><label>Table 1</label><caption><p id="d1e472">Parameters of the three representative RO events used for
detailed inspection. Azimuth of the RO event plane is defined relative to
north, counting over west.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="6">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="left"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Event ID</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Latitude</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Longitude</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Azimuth</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Local time</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Solar activity</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Occ.530</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">55.8<inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">61.8<inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">167.2<inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">21:38 LT</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">F10.7 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 140</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Occ.20</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">43.3<inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">36.5<inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> W</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">154.1<inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">22:34 LT</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">F10.7 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 140</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Occ.25</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">81.1<inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">5.4<inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> W</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">94.1<inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">01:09 LT</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">F10.7 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 140</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e687">Figure 3a shows the behavior of the excess phases of the three events. The
L1 and L2 excess phases are around <inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>11 to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>15 and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>18 to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>25 m,
respectively, typical for medium solar activity (Liu et al., 2013). After
the standard ionospheric correction, the ionosphere-corrected (Lc) excess phases are<?pagebreak page2431?> found near 0 m
as should be the case. The excess-phase RIE profiles (Fig. 3b) exhibit some
spiky behavior for the two exceptional events, on top of comparatively
low-noise RIEs otherwise. This points to unphysical values at the spiky
impact height levels, given that the large-scale 3-D ionospheric structure of
the NeUoG model should be physically unable to induce such sharp changes. It
hence indicates that the ray tracing is technically challenged along the
signal propagation paths pertaining to these levels by slight ionospheric
model discontinuities, which render millimetric excess-phase accuracy
unattainable for these ray paths.</p>
      <p id="d1e718">As Leitinger and Kirchengast (1997) describe, substantial empirical modeling
effort went into strict smoothness of the NeUoG electron density field and
its 3-D derivatives that are key for high-accuracy ray tracing; nevertheless
some slight discontinuities have likely remained in some rare locations of
the modeling space spanned by altitude, latitude, longitude, (universal)
time, month, and solar activity. It will therefore be important to separate
such technical modeling effects from<?pagebreak page2432?> the physical effects on the propagating
signals that cause high RIEs.</p>
      <p id="d1e721">Figure 3c shows that, for all three events, the difference between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> somewhat increases with increasing impact
height, a feature already visible in the Liu et al. (2013) results. It is
caused by the increasing ionospheric influence when tangent point heights gradually
approach ionospheric <inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:mi>E</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> layer heights around 105 km from below. These overall
differences between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> amount to about 15
to 20 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>rad near 80 km and are effectively eliminated by the standard
ionospheric correction, bringing the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> profile to near zero as
should be the case. Nevertheless, substantial waveform-like perturbations
remain on <inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for the two exceptional events Occ.530 and Occ.20,
which even more clearly show up in the bending angle RIE profile (Fig. 3d).</p>
      <p id="d1e806">Intercomparing Fig. 3d with b suggests that these waveform-like
perturbations in the bending angle RIE are mainly induced by propagating the
spiky excess-phase perturbations through the bending angle retrieval, which
involves filtering and a derivative operation from excess phase to Doppler
shift (Schwarz et al., 2017). One main cause that has driven many of the
exceptional events into the outlier range (i.e., into exceeding 7 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>rad
somewhere within 30 to 80 km) is thus evidently the technical effects from
the ray tracing through the NeUoG ionosphere, which is not perfectly smooth
everywhere in its electron density and hence refractivity field derivatives.
It is thus important to more closely explore the along-ray signal dynamics
in order to understand how such technical effects may occur along ray paths
and in particular in order to better understand the physical effects that
drive high RIEs. Our related along-ray analysis methodology is introduced
next.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <title>Investigation methodology</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2.SSS1">
  <title>Ray tracing method</title>
      <p id="d1e828">The ray tracing technique is commonly used for calculating propagation paths
of an electromagnetic signal in a medium specified by a position-dependent
refractive index field. It has become a significant tool for investigating
signal propagation in RO technology. For example, Ladreiter and Kirchengast (1996), Syndergaard (2000), Gobiet and Kirchengast (2004),
Steiner and Kirchengast (2005), Hoque and Jakowski (2010), Mannucci et al. (2011),
Danzer et al. (2013, 2015), and Liu et al. (2013, 2015) have employed this
method inter alia or with a main topical focus to investigate the ionospheric effects
on GNSS RO signals. Danzer et al. (2015) noted that their analysis was
somewhat limited by high noise of the simulated bending angle profiles at
mid- to high latitudes, which partly reflected the degrading impact of
technical ray tracer effects that we also encounter and more explicitly
address in this study.</p>
      <p id="d1e831">We employ the 3-D numerical ray tracing technique integrated in the
End-to-end GNSS Occultation Performance Simulation and Processing System
version 5.6 (EGOPS 5.6; Fritzer et al., 2013) in the same way as used by
Liu et al. (2013, 2015) for simulating the GPS-to-LEO signal propagation
through the atmosphere–ionosphere system; for a detailed description of the
end-to-end simulation setup the reader is therefore referred to these recent
studies. Here we specifically refined and enhanced this setup in the 3-D ray
tracing part by adding the co-computation and result extraction for a range
of key variables along the propagation paths, instead of only providing the
final observational variables of an RO event at the LEO receiver position.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2.SSS2">
  <title>Investigated variables</title>
      <p id="d1e840">We implemented detailed along-ray diagnostic capabilities into the 3-D ray
tracer of the EGOPS 5.6 software (Fritzer et al., 2013), which is an
extensively proven high-accuracy ray tracer originally developed in the
1990s (Syndergaard, 1998, 1999). In particular, we computed the following
key diagnostic variables for all individual numerical steps along the ray
paths simulated for the GPS L1 and L2 frequencies as well as for a reference
case without ionosphere (Lr), with each ray path starting at the GPS
transmitter position and ending at the LEO receiver position:
3-D position in the WGS84-based Earth-centered, Earth-fixed (ECEF) system,
storing both the cartesian (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:mi>X</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:mi>Y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:mi>Z</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) and geodetic (height, latitude,
longitude) coordinates; along-ray distance relative to the TP,
the latter evaluated as the ray's point of closest approach to the
WGS84 ellipsoidal surface (parabolic vertex fit to the three along-ray
positions closest to the surface); atmospheric refractivity; L1 and L2
ionospheric refractivity; L1 and L2 impact parameter and impact parameter
difference to the initial impact parameter at the GPS transmitter position
(termed “delta impact parameter”, induced along the ray in the case of
non-spherical-symmetry conditions); accumulated L1, L2, and
ionosphere-corrected (Lc) bending angle (bending angle accrued from the GPS
transmitter position to the along-ray position); and RIE of the Lc bending angle, estimated relative to the Lr bending
angle obtained from a simulation case without ionosphere (Liu et al., 2013).</p>
      <p id="d1e864">These along-ray variables are computed for all available ray paths from 80 to
20 km impact height, which are produced at 50 Hz sampling rate for any
RO event investigated. This leads to a dense sampling by roughly 1500
ray paths in this altitude range (i.e., typical average scan velocities of
RO events are near 2 km s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in this domain). Likewise the ray tracer
provides fairly dense along-ray stepping, employing an adaptive step size
concept with finest steps at highest local refractive index changes (for
details see, e.g., Syndergaard, 1999; Fritzer et al., 2013). Together these
features enable inspecting the propagation characteristics of RO events
through the atmosphere–ionosphere system at very high resolution in a
convenient 2-D along-ray distance vs. impact height coordinate system that
accurately represents the real 3-D-warped occultation event plane between the
GPS and LEO orbit arcs.</p>
      <p id="d1e879">We will inspect the results for the three representative<?pagebreak page2433?> RO events chosen
(Occ.530, Occ.20, Occ.25; see Sect. 2.1 above) in this along-ray distance
vs. impact height coordinate system. Before turning to this, we briefly
summarize here the equations for the along-ray computation of those key
variables that we will inspect closely. This aims to facilitate an
appropriate understanding and interpretation of the results.</p>
      <p id="d1e882">On the basis of Snell's law, when the Earth's atmosphere and ionosphere are
assumed spherically symmetric, Bouguer's rule can be used to describe the
refraction of a ray path in terms of a constant impact parameter (e.g.,
Budden, 1985),
              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E1" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M48" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi>sin⁡</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Φ</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">constant</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
            where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the impact parameter; <inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the radial distance from the center of
the curvature of the refracted ray to any point of the ray path; <inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the
refractive index (at radial distance <inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, which is related to refractivity <inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:mi>N</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> via
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mi>N</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>; and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Φ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the local angle between the radial
position vector and the ray direction at any point of the ray.</p>
      <p id="d1e981">Equation (1) implies that, at each point along the ray path, the impact parameter
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is equal to its initial value at the GPS transmitter position in the case of
spherical symmetry, which leads to

                  <disp-formula specific-use="align" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M57" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mi>sin⁡</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Φ</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mfenced open="|" close="|"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">R</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">→</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">r</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false" mathvariant="normal">^</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E2"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mfenced close="|" open="|"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">R</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">→</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mi>sin⁡</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Φ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>

              where index <inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> counts the (numerical 3-D ray tracer) points along the ray path
starting at the GPS transmitter position <inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">R</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">→</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
ending at LEO; <inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">R</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">→</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">r</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal" stretchy="false">^</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are the
radial position vector and unit vector along the ray direction at point <inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>,
respectively; and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Φ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the local angle between position vector
and (initial) ray direction at the GPS transmitter, where we can furthermore
assume that the refractivity is zero.</p>
      <p id="d1e1167">In reality non-spherical-symmetry conditions of appreciable size will
frequently occur, in particular between the ionospheric signal propagation
inbound from the GPS and (after propagating through the atmosphere at
tangent heights below 80 km) the one outbound to LEO (cf. Fig. 1); see,
for example, the RO events discussed by Liu et al. (2013). In order to inspect the
impact parameter changes along the ray path in these cases where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
computed according to the second right-hand-side term of Eq. (2) will vary along
the ray path, we co-compute the delta impact parameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> as
the difference of the impact parameter at points <inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> of the ray path and the
impact parameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at the GPS location:
              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E3" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M68" display="block"><mml:mrow><?xmltex \hack{\hbox\bgroup\fontsize{9}{9}\selectfont$\displaystyle}?><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mfenced open="|" close="|"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">R</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">→</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">r</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false" mathvariant="normal">^</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mfenced open="|" close="|"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">R</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">→</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mi>sin⁡</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Φ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>.</mml:mo><?xmltex \hack{$\egroup}?></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
            Complementary to the geometrical parameters available from the ray tracing,
the refractivity <inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:mi>N</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> comprises atmospheric and ionospheric terms, which are
formulated based on standard equations as (e.g., Liu et al., 2015; Eqs. 1
and 4 therein)
              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E4" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M70" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">atm</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ion</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">atm</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ion</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">e</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
            where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">atm</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 77.60 K hPa<inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ion</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 40.31 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 10<inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
are the classical refractivity coefficients, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> [hPa] and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:mi>T</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>
[K] are atmospheric pressure and temperature (modeled by MSIS-90), <inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">e</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
[m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>] is the ionospheric electron density (modeled by NeUoG), and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> [Hz]
is the GPS signal frequency (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">L</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.57542 GHz; <inline-formula><mml:math id="M84" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">L</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.22760
GHz).</p>
      <p id="d1e1526">In addition, the accumulated bending angle <inline-formula><mml:math id="M85" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, which accrues
from the GPS position to any point <inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> along the ray path, can be readily
computed as the angle between the initial ray direction (unit vector
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">r</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal" stretchy="false">^</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
and the ray direction at point <inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (unit vector
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">r</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal" stretchy="false">^</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>:
              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E5" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M90" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>arccos⁡</mml:mi><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">r</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false" mathvariant="normal">^</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">r</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal" stretchy="false">^</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
            The total bending angle along the entire ray is hence obtained by finally
computing the angle between initial direction at GPS and terminal direction
at LEO (subscript L):
              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E6" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M91" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">total</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>arccos⁡</mml:mi><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">r</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false" mathvariant="normal">^</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">G</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi mathvariant="bold-italic">r</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false" mathvariant="normal">^</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">L</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
            Furthermore and importantly, the accumulated bending angle RIE, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RIE</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, can be estimated (after linearly interpolating in the
along-ray distance coordinate to the ray points <inline-formula><mml:math id="M93" display="inline"><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> of the reference bending angle
obtained without the ionosphere) by subtracting the reference bending angle
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> from the ionosphere-corrected bending angle <inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
(with the latter obtained by the standard dual-frequency correction of
bending angles; e.g., Liu et al., 2015; Eq. 3 therein):
              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E7" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M96" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RIE</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">r</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
            As a complement to these along-ray accumulated quantities, the local
bending angles and bending angle RIEs caused by individual ray tracer steps
can also be readily co-computed, by differencing the values between adjacent
points <inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>1 and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>:

                  <disp-formula specific-use="align" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M99" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E8"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">step</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E9"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RIE</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">step</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RIE</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RIE</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula></p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 4</label><caption><p id="d1e1865">Images of the atmospheric and ionospheric refractivity
(Eq. 4) in the along-ray distance (relative to tangent point) vs. impact
height coordinate system for non-spherical-symmetry <bold>(a)</bold> and
spherical symmetry <bold>(b)</bold> ionospheric conditions, for medium solar
activity (F10.7 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 140) and for the GPS frequencies L1 (left sub-panels), and
L2 (right sub-panels) for the three representative events (Occ.25, top
sub-panels; Occ.20, middle sub-panels, Occ.530, bottom sub-panels). The
narrow black stripe visible in the images near the right margin (3500 km
along-ray distance) is space above the LEO height (reached at around
3250 km). The two bottom rows depict the corresponding along-ray behavior of
the atmospheric <bold>(c, d)</bold> and ionospheric <bold>(e, f)</bold>
refractivities at three representative impact heights (red, 80 km; green, 50 km; blue, 30 km) for non-spherical (left; <bold>c</bold> and <bold>e</bold>)
and spherical (right; <bold>d</bold> and <bold>f</bold>) ionospheric conditions, for the Occ.20 (left sub-panel in <bold>c</bold>–<bold>f</bold>) and
Occ.530 (right sub-panel in <bold>c</bold>–<bold>f</bold>) event. The sub-panel titles (green
in <bold>a</bold>–<bold>b</bold> panels, black on top of <bold>c</bold>–<bold>f</bold> panels) identify the individual cases by a
concise acronym; the physical units used are refractivity (N) units (1 NU <inline-formula><mml:math id="M101" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 10<inline-formula><mml:math id="M102" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)).</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=369.885827pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/11/2427/2018/amt-11-2427-2018-f04.jpg"/>

          </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 5</label><caption><p id="d1e1961">Images of the delta impact parameter (Eq. 3) in the
along-ray distance (relative to tangent point) vs. impact height
coordinate system for non-spherical-symmetry <bold>(a)</bold> and spherical
symmetry <bold>(b)</bold> ionospheric conditions, for medium solar activity
(F10.7 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M103" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 140) and for the GPS frequencies L1 (left sub-panels) and L2 (right
sub-panels) for the three representative events (Occ.25, top sub-panels;
Occ.20, middle sub-panels, Occ.530, bottom sub-panels). The narrow black
stripe visible in the images near the right margin (3500 km along-ray
distance) is space above the LEO height (reached at around 3250 km).
The bottom row depicts the corresponding along-ray behavior of the delta
impact parameter at three representative impact heights (red, 80 km; green,
50 km; blue, 30 km) for non-spherical <bold>(c)</bold> and spherical <bold>(d)</bold> ionospheric conditions, for the Occ.20 (left sub-panels) and
Occ.530 (right sub-panels) event. The sub-panel titles (red in
<bold>a</bold> and <bold>b</bold>, black on top of <bold>c</bold> and <bold>d</bold>) identify the individual cases by a
concise acronym.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=369.885827pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/11/2427/2018/amt-11-2427-2018-f05.jpg"/>

          </fig>

</sec>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <title>Results and discussion</title>
      <p id="d1e2010">Figures 4 to 7 sequentially illustrate for the three representative RO
events (Occ.25, Occ.20, Occ.530) the along-ray behavior of the key variables
atmospheric and ionospheric refractivity (Eq. 4), L1 and L2 delta impact
parameter (Eq. 3), L1 and L2 accumulated bending angle (Eq. 5), and
ionosphere-corrected Lc bending angle and bending angle RIE (Eq. 7).
This is done in the form of imaging these<?pagebreak page2434?> variables for the three
RO events in the along-ray distance vs. impact height coordinate system
(panels a and b of Figs. 4–7; <inline-formula><mml:math id="M104" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>3500 km along-ray distance about ray
tangent points; impact height range: 20 to 80 km) and in the form of depicting
the along-ray behavior of the two exceptional events along representative
impact heights (80, 50, 30 km; panels c–f in Fig. 4 and panels c–d in
Figs. 5–7).</p>
      <p id="d1e2020">In order to enable close inspection of the critical role of ionospheric
symmetries, each of the Figs. 4–7 directly intercompares the non-spherical
and spherical symmetry<?pagebreak page2435?> conditions. In terms of solar activity only the
results for the medium solar activity level (F10.7 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M105" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 140) are illustrated,
since we found that the influence of solar activity (which mainly drives the
ionization level in the NeUoG model) is primarily to steer the magnitude of
the effects (see Liu et al., 2013, 2015). The typical along-ray
characteristics are therefore reasonably well represented by just
illustrating the medium-solar-activity case.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F6" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 6</label><caption><p id="d1e2032">Images of the accumulated bending angle (Eq. 5) in the
along-ray distance vs. impact height coordinate system for
non-spherical-symmetry <bold>(a)</bold> and spherical symmetry <bold>(b)</bold> ionospheric
conditions, and the corresponding along-ray behavior at three selected
impact heights <bold>(c, d)</bold>. All panels are shown in the same format as
for the delta impact parameter in Fig. 5 (see that caption for more
details). Here the physical units are microradians (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M106" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>rad).</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=369.885827pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/11/2427/2018/amt-11-2427-2018-f06.jpg"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e2058">Figure 4 shows the atmospheric and ionospheric refractivities and underpins
that the along-ray differences of inbound ionosphere (from the GPS) and
outbound ionosphere (towards LEO) refractivities can be substantial. For
example, in the case of the Occ.20 event these refractivities differ by more
than a factor of 2 near the ionospheric <inline-formula><mml:math id="M107" display="inline"><mml:mi>F</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> layer maximum, where the
refractivities are largest (e.g., L2 inbound refractivity near 10 NU;
L2 outbound refractivity reaching more than 20 NU). As expected, the atmospheric
refractivity starts to exceed 1 NU only below about 35 km, and of course it
exhibits no frequency dependence. It is thus essential to have a reliable
first-order and higher-order ionospheric correction to strongly mitigate the
ionospheric effects that appear prominent down to the lower stratosphere.</p>
      <p id="d1e2069">Figure 5 shows the L1 and L2 delta impact parameters, which first of all
verifies the reliability of the numerical ray tracing estimates, since the
spherically symmetric ionosphere conditions indeed lead to along-ray impact
parameter changes of within 1 m only. This confirms that under such
spherical symmetry conditions the bending angle retrievals (e.g., Schwarz et
al., 2017) will be highly accurate, including for the impact height that is
decisive for enabling accurate<?pagebreak page2436?> vertical geolocation (Scherllin-Pirscher et
al., 2017). Under non-spherical-symmetry ionosphere conditions, the Occ.20
event with the largest asymmetry of the example events shows that along-ray
L1 and L2 impact parameter variations of more than 10 to 20 m are
possible and are generally found to be negative (relative to the initial impact
parameter at the GPS transmitter). Lc bending angle retrievals with their
intrinsic spherical symmetry assumption should thus receive higher-order
ionospheric correction to mitigate such possible impacts.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F7" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 7</label><caption><p id="d1e2074">Images of the accumulated ionosphere-corrected Lc bending
angle (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M108" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>rad) <bold>(a)</bold> and bending angle RIE (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M109" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>rad) <bold>(b)</bold> (Eq. 7) in the along-ray distance vs. impact height
coordinate system for non-spherical-symmetry (left sub-panels) and spherical
symmetry (right sub-panels) ionospheric conditions, for medium solar
activity (F10.7 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M110" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 140) and the same three representative events also shown
in Figs. 4–6. The bottom row <bold>(c, d)</bold> depicts the corresponding
along-ray behavior of the accumulated bending angle RIE at three
representative impact heights (red, 80 km; green, 50 km; blue, 30 km) in the
same format as in Figs. 4–6. Since the raw RIE estimates (light lines in
<bold>c</bold> and <bold>d</bold>, with intermittent spiky behavior) are noisy due to technical ray
tracing effects from limited smoothness of the NeUoG model (Sect. 2.1), the
essential behavior (heavy lines in <bold>c</bold> and <bold>d</bold>, with smooth behavior) is shown with
the RIE data smoothed along-ray by a first-median-then-mean filter (using
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M111" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>350 km moving median filter width and then <inline-formula><mml:math id="M112" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>150 km moving
average filter width).</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=369.885827pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/11/2427/2018/amt-11-2427-2018-f07.jpg"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e2143">Figure 6 depicts the accumulated L1 and L2 bending angles, which highlight
the significant along-ray modulations that the bending angle receives due to
the ionospheric influences relative to the atmospheric bending angle, in
particular above about 35 km in the upper stratosphere and mesosphere, where
the neutral atmospheric bending angle is rather small. Below 35 km the
dominating influence of the atmosphere in the vicinity of the tangent point
location becomes prominently visible, in line with the exponential increase
of atmospheric refractivity (Fig. 4) and hence atmospheric bending down into
the lower stratosphere. Nevertheless even at 30 km the ionospheric
contribution is still visible, which underscores that an accurate
ionospheric correction with minimized residual error will be vital.</p>
      <p id="d1e2146">Figure 7a shows the ionosphere-corrected Lc bending angle and indicates,
compared to Figs. 6a and b, that the standard linear dual-frequency
correction of bending angles basically does a very effective job in
eliminating the ionospheric bending angle contributions. The Lc bending
angle images look visually very clean and are highly dominated by just the
atmospheric accumulated bending angle accruing at all heights around the
tangent point location. Directly inspecting the bending angle RIE, finally,
shows that the along-ray behavior and accumulated magnitude of the
higher-order RIE left by the linear correction significantly depend in
particular on asymmetry conditions. Technical ray tracer effects are<?pagebreak page2437?> also
visible as intermittent spiky behavior, since the RIEs are at the sub-microradian
to microradian magnitude level only, which is a challenge for the
ionospheric model smoothness as discussed in Sect. 2.1.</p>
      <p id="d1e2149">The Occ.530 event under non-spherical-symmetry appears to accumulate the
highest RIEs of near 2 to 4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M113" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>rad at LEO, while the spherical
symmetry cases both accumulate RIEs up to around 0.5 to 1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M114" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>rad or less
only. This is in line with Fig. 2, which shows for the majority of the 26
exceptional events the dominance of asymmetry and 3-D ray tracing effects in
driving the RIE magnitude. Also, as shown by Fig. 7c and d (and found for
other RO events inspected but not separately shown), the mesospheric RIEs
above about 50 km generally appear to be higher than the upper-stratospheric
ones from 50 km downwards. This is in line with findings of Syndergaard (2000) and likely driven by the increased closeness of the tangent point
height to the ionospheric <inline-formula><mml:math id="M115" display="inline"><mml:mi>E</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> layer peaking near 105 km, which makes the Lc
bending angle more vulnerable to higher-order RIEs.</p>
      <p id="d1e2176">Figure 7c and d (and along-ray results for further exceptional events not
separately shown) also clearly indicate the mixing-in of technical ray
tracer effects in our simulations. These render it more difficult to
rigorously quantify the (smooth) physical RIE effects from the large-scale
ionospheric model structure since, despite the reasonable smoothing applied,
the spiky components may somewhat perturb the smooth accumulated
results as well. In the future we will therefore aim to further improve the simulation
setup to fully isolate the technical from the physics-based propagation
effects. For now we have found clear evidence, nevertheless, that currently both
technical effects and cases with physically high RIEs from ionospheric
asymmetries play important roles in explaining the anomalous behavior of the
exceptional RO events.</p>
</sec>
<?pagebreak page2438?><sec id="Ch1.S4" sec-type="conclusions">
  <title>Summary and conclusions</title>
      <p id="d1e2185">Previous theoretical and simulation studies as well as empirical studies
that we surveyed in the Introduction have
characterized and quantified higher-order residual ionospheric errors (RIEs)
in bending angles by analyses of individual events as well as ensembles of
events. The statistical results showed that the mean bending angle RIE
biases are predominantly negative, typically at the 0.03 to 0.1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M116" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>rad
level, and these biases may lead to systematic errors in stratospheric
climatologies built from retrieved profiles. The RIE standard deviations are
typically at the 0.1 to 0.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M117" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>rad level, and they have a clear tendency
to increase with increasing solar activity, i.e., with increasing ionization
level (electron density) in the ionosphere.</p>
      <p id="d1e2204">In our previous Liu et al. (2015) study we had contributed to these findings
but were left with 26 exceptional RO events with very high RIEs, at the 1 to
10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M118" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>rad standard deviation level, in the context of about 700 standard
events with low-noise RIEs within 0.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M119" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>rad standard deviation. In this
study we therefore placed focus on these 26 exceptional events and, by way of
detailed along-ray analyses of ray tracing simulations over the stratosphere
and mesosphere, inspected the causes of anomalously high RIEs. The goal at
the same time was to deepen quantitative insight into how RIEs accumulate
during signal propagation, along with accumulation of the total atmospheric
bending angles that are the desired RO observables.</p>
      <p id="d1e2223">From the results of these analyses we conclude with the following main
findings on the causes of the exceptional RO events:
<list list-type="order"><list-item>
      <p id="d1e2228">Strengthening previous results by Mannucci et al. (2010, 2011), we find
that asymmetric ionospheric conditions play an important role for
anomalously high RIEs, more than ionization levels driven by solar activity
and possible geographic location dependencies that seemed to be present from
salient geographic clustering of the majority of exceptional RO events in
two regions (European–Asian region and Indian Ocean region).</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e2232">The fact that no obvious physics-based explanation was found for the
geographic clustering and the intermittent spiky behavior found in simulated
RIEs indicates that a portion of the anomalous RIEs of the exceptional RO events
were caused by the technical challenge of ray tracing at millimetric
excess-phase accuracy through the 3-D ionospheric model NeUoG, which is not perfectly
smooth everywhere in its electron density field derivatives.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e2236">The detailed along-ray analyses of atmospheric and ionospheric
refractivities, impact parameter changes, bending angles, and RIEs also
revealed that along-ray L1 and L2 impact parameter variations of more than
10 to 20 m are possible due to ionospheric asymmetries and are
generally found to be negative (relative to the initial impact parameter at the
GPS transmitter). Standard bending angle retrievals with their intrinsic
spherical symmetry assumption should thus receive higher-order ionospheric
correction to mitigate such impacts.</p></list-item><list-item>
      <p id="d1e2240">The mesospheric RIEs above about 50 km generally appear to be higher
than the upper-stratospheric ones from 50 km downwards. This is in line with
findings of Syndergaard (2000) and likely driven by the increased closeness
of the tangent point height to the ionospheric <inline-formula><mml:math id="M120" display="inline"><mml:mi>E</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> layer peaking near 105 km,
which makes the standard ionosphere-corrected bending angles more vulnerable
to higher-order RIEs.</p></list-item></list>
Overall this study of exceptional RO events with anomalous RIEs in our
end-to-end simulations indicated that the main causes are a combination of
physics-based effects, in particular ionospheric asymmetries, and of
technical ray tracer effects due to occasionally imperfect smoothness of
modeling ionospheric refractivity field derivatives. This makes it more
difficult to rigorously quantify the physics-based RIE effects from the
large-scale ionospheric model structure since the intermittent spiky nature
of the technical effects may somewhat perturb the smooth accumulated
results as well.</p>
      <p id="d1e2251">In the future we will therefore aim to further improve our along-ray simulation
and analysis system to fully isolate the technical from the physics-based
propagation effects. For now we have found clear evidence, nevertheless, that
currently both technical effects and cases with physically high RIEs from
ionospheric asymmetries play major roles in explaining the anomalous
behavior of the exceptional RO events. The detailed along-ray modeling
system will also be valuable beyond this work for additional GNSS RO signal
propagation studies.</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="codeavailability"><title>Code availability</title>

      <p id="d1e2259">The ECMWF
(Reading, UK) is thanked for access to their archived analysis and forecast
data (more information available at <uri>http://www.ecmwf.int/en/</uri>
forecasts/datasets). The software code used for this study does not belong
to the public domain and cannot be distributed. To access the relevant
result files of this study, please contact the corresponding author.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests"><title>Competing interests</title>

      <p id="d1e2268">The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="sistatement"><title>Special issue statement</title>

      <p id="d1e2274">This article is part of the special issue “Observing Atmosphere and Climate with Occultation Techniques – Results from the
OPAC-IROWG 2016 Workshop”. It is a result of the International Workshop on Occultations for Probing Atmosphere and Climate, Leibnitz, Austria,
8–14 September 2016.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><?pagebreak page2439?><p id="d1e2280">This research was partially supported by the National Natural Science
Foundation of China (grant nos. 41405039, 41775034, 41405040, 41505030,
41606206, and 41730109) and the FengYun-3 (FY-3) Global Navigation Satellite
System Occultation Sounder (GNOS) development and manufacture project led by
NSSC, CAS. The research at WEGC/University of Graz was supported by the European
Space Agency (ESA) projects OPSGRAS and MMValRO and the Austrian Research
Promotion Agency (FFG) project OPSCLIMPROP (ASAP-9 project no. 840070). We
acknowledge Johannes Fritzer (WEGC) for his support in EGOPS software developments
valuable to this study. The research at SPACE/RMIT University was supported
by the Australian Research Council (ARC) (LP0883288), the Australian
Antarctic Division (project no. 4159), and the CAS/SAFEA International
Partnership Program for Creative Research Teams (grant no. KZZD-EW-TZ-05).
The support from the Jiangsu dual creative talents and Jiangsu dual creative
team program projects awarded to CUMT in 2017 is acknowledged.
<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?><?xmltex \hack{\newline}?>
Edited by: Sean Healy<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?>
Reviewed by: two anonymous referees</p></ack><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>Angerer, B., Ladstädter, F., Scherllin-Pirscher, B., Schwärz, M., Steiner, A. K., Foelsche, U., and Kirchengast, G.:
Quality aspects of the Wegener Center multi-satellite GPS radio occultation record OPSv5.6, Atmos. Meas. Tech.,
10, 4845–4863, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-10-4845-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-10-4845-2017</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>Angling, M. J., Elvidge, S., and Healy, S. B.: Improved model for correcting the ionospheric impact on bending angle in radio
occultation measurements, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 11, 2213–2224, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-2213-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-11-2213-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>Anthes, R. A.: Exploring Earth's atmosphere with radio occultation: contributions to weather, climate and space weather,
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 4, 1077–1103, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-4-1077-2011" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-4-1077-2011</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
Bassiri, S. and Hajj, G. A.: Higher-order ionospheric effects on the GPS
observables and means of modeling them, Manuscr. Geodaet., 18, 280–289, 1993.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
Budden, K. G.: The propagation of radio waves: the theory of radio waves of
low power in the ionosphere and magnetosphere, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, 1985.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>Coleman, C. J. and Forte, B.: On the residual ionospheric error in radio
occultation measurements, Radio Sci., 52, 918–937, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016RS006239" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2016RS006239</ext-link>,
2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>Danzer, J., Scherllin-Pirscher, B., and Foelsche, U.: Systematic residual ionospheric errors in radio occultation data
and a potential way to minimize them, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 6, 2169–2179, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-6-2169-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-6-2169-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>Danzer, J., Healy, S. B., and Culverwell, I. D.: A simulation study with a new residual ionospheric error model for GPS
radio occultation climatologies, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 8, 3395–3404, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-8-3395-2015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-8-3395-2015</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
Edwards, P. G. and Pawlak, D.: Metop: The space segment for Eumetsat's
Polar System, ESA Bull., 102, 6–18, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>Foelsche, U., Scherllin-Pirscher, B., Ladstädter, F., Steiner, A. K., and Kirchengast, G.: Refractivity and temperature climate records
from multiple radio occultation satellites consistent within 0.05 %, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 4, 2007–2018, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-4-2007-2011" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-4-2007-2011</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
Fritzer, J., Kirchengast, G., and Pock, M.: End-to-End Generic Occultation
Performance Simulation and Processing System version 5.6 (EGOPS 5.6)
Software User Manual, Tech. Rep. ESA-ESTEC WEGC-EGOPS-2013-TR01, Wegener
Center and Inst. for Geophys., Astrophys., and Meteorol., Univ. of Graz,
Austria, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>Gobiet, A. and Kirchengast, G.: Advancements of Global Navigation Satellite
System radio occultation retrieval in the upper stratosphere for optimal
climate monitoring utility, J. Geophys. Res., 109, D24110,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2004jd005117" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2004jd005117</ext-link>, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>Gobiet, A., Kirchengast, G., Manney, G. L., Borsche, M., Retscher, C., and Stiller, G.: Retrieval of temperature profiles from CHAMP
for climate monitoring: intercomparison with Envisat MIPAS and GOMOS and different atmospheric analyses, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7,
3519–3536, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-3519-2007" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-7-3519-2007</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>Gorbunov, M. E.: Ionospheric correction and statistical optimization of
radio occultation data, Radio Sci., 37, 1084, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2000rs002370" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2000rs002370</ext-link>,
2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>Hajj, G. A., Kursinski, E. R., Romans, L. J., Bertiger, W. I., and Leroy, S.
S.: A technical description of atmospheric sounding by GPS occultation, J.
Atmos. Sol.-Terr. Phy., 64, 451–469, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6826(01)00114-6" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/S1364-6826(01)00114-6</ext-link>,
2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>Healy, S. B. and Culverwell, I. D.: A modification to the standard ionospheric correction method used in GPS radio occultation,
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 8, 3385–3393, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-8-3385-2015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-8-3385-2015</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>Hedin, A. E.: Extension of the MSIS thermosphere model into the middle and
lower atmosphere, J. Geophys. Res., 96, 1159–1172, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/90JA02125" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/90JA02125</ext-link>,
1991.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>Ho, S.-P., Hunt, D., Steiner, A. K., Mannucci, A. J., Kirchengast, G.,
Gleisner, H., Heise, S., von Engeln, A., Marquardt, C., Sokolovskiy, S.,
Schreiner, W., Scherllin-Pirscher, B., Ao, C., Wickert, J., Syndergaard, S.,
Lauritsen, K. B., Leroy, S., Kursinski, E. R., Kuo, Y-H., Foelsche, U.,
Schmidt, T., and Gorbunov, M.: Reproducibility of GPS radio occultation data
for climate monitoring: Profile-to-profile inter-comparison of CHAMP climate
records 2002 to 2008 from six data centers, J. Geophys. Res., 117, D18111,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JD017665" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2012JD017665</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>Hoque, M. M. and Jakowski, N.: Higher order ionospheric propagation effects
on GPS radio occultation signals, Adv. Space Res., 46, 162–173,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2010.02.013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.asr.2010.02.013</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>Hoque, M. M. and Jakowski, N.: Ionospheric bending correction for GNSS
radio occultation signals, Radio Sci., 46, RS0D06, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010rs004583" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2010rs004583</ext-link>,
2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>Kursinski, E. R., Hajj, G. A., Schofield, J. T., Linfield, R. P., and Hardy,
K. R.: Observing Earth's atmosphere with radio occultation measurements
using the Global Positioning System, J. Geophys. Res., 102, 23429–23465,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/97jd01569" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/97jd01569</ext-link>, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>Lackner, B. C., Steiner, A. K., Hegerl, G. C., and Kirchengast, G.:
Atmospheric climate change detection by radio occultation data using a
fingerprinting method, J. Climate, 24, 5275–5291,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/2011JCLI3966.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/2011JCLI3966.1</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page2440?><ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>Ladreiter, H. P. and Kirchengast, G.: GPS/GLONASS sensing of the neutral
atmosphere: Model-independent correction of ionospheric influences, Radio
Sci., 31, 877–891, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/96rs01094" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/96rs01094</ext-link>, 1996.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>Leitinger, R. and Kirchengast, G.: Easy to use global and regional
ionospheric models – A report on approaches used in Graz, Acta Geod. Geophys.
Hu., 32, 329–342, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03325504" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/BF03325504</ext-link>, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>Liu, C. L., Kirchengast, G., Zhang, K. F., Norman, R., Li, Y., Zhang, S. C.,
Carter, B., Fritzer, J., Schwaerz, M., Choy, S. L., Wu, S. Q., and Tan, Z.
X.: Characterisation of residual ionospheric errors in bending angles using
GNSS RO end-to-end simulations, Adv. Space Res., 52, 821–836,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2013.05.021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.asr.2013.05.021</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>Liu, C. L., Kirchengast, G., Zhang, K., Norman, R., Li, Y., Zhang, S. C., Fritzer, J., Schwaerz, M., Wu, S. Q., and Tan, Z. X.:
Quantifying residual ionospheric errors in GNSS radio occultation bending angles based on ensembles of profiles
from end-to-end simulations, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 8, 2999–3019, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-8-2999-2015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-8-2999-2015</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>
Loiselet, M., Stricker, N., Menard, Y., and Luntama, J.-P.: GRAS – Metop's
GPS-based atmospheric sounder, ESA Bull., 102, 38–44, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>Luntama, J.-P., Kirchengast, G., Borsche, M., Foelsche, U., Steiner, A.,
Healy, S., von Engeln, A., O'Clerigh, E., and Marquardt, C.: Prospects of
the EPS GRAS mission for operational atmospheric applications, B. Am.
Meteorol. Soc., 89, 1863–1875, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/2008BAMS2399.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/2008BAMS2399.1</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>Mannucci, A. J., Ao, C. O., Pi, X., and Iijima, B. A.: Impact of the
ionosphere on GNSS radio occultation retrievals, Presentation at the
OPAC-GRASSAF-IROWG International Workshop September 6–11, 2010, Graz
Austria, available at:
<uri>http://wegcwww.uni-graz.at/opac2010/pdf_presentation/opac_2010_mannucci_anthony_presentation71.pdf</uri> (last access: 23 March 2018), 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>Mannucci, A. J., Ao, C. O., Pi, X., and Iijima, B. A.: The impact of large scale ionospheric structure on radio occultation
retrievals, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 4, 2837–2850, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-4-2837-2011" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-4-2837-2011</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
Melbourne, W. G., Davis, E. S., Duncan, C. B., Hajj, G. A., Hardy, K. R.,
Kursinski, E. R., Meehan, T. K., Yong, L. E., and Yunck, T. P.: The
application of spaceborne GPS to atmospheric limb sounding and global change
monitoring, JPL Publication 94-18, Jet Propulsion Lab., Cal. Tech.,
Pasadena, CA, 1994.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>Scherllin-Pirscher, B., Kirchengast, G., Steiner, A. K., Kuo, Y.-H., and Foelsche, U.: Quantifying uncertainty in climatological
fields from GPS radio occultation: an empirical-analytical error model, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 4, 2019–2034, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-4-2019-2011" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-4-2019-2011</ext-link>,
2011.
</mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>Scherllin-Pirscher, B., Steiner, A. K., Kirchengast, G., Schwaerz, M., and
Leroy, S. S.: The power of vertical geolocation of atmospheric profiles from
GNSS radio occultation, J. Geophys. Res. Atmos., 122, 1595–1616,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD025902" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2016JD025902</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>Schwarz, J., Kirchengast, G., and Schwaerz, M.: Integrating uncertainty propagation in GNSS radio occultation retrieval:
from excess phase to atmospheric bending angle profiles, Atmos. Meas. Tech. Discuss., <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-2017-159" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-2017-159</ext-link>, in review,
2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>Steiner, A. K. and Kirchengast, G.: Error analysis for GNSS radio
occultation data based on ensembles of profiles from end-to-end simulations,
J. Geophys. Res., 110, 1–21, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JD005251" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2004JD005251</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>Steiner, A. K., Kirchengast, G., Lackner, B. C., Pirscher, B., Borsche, M.,
and Foelsche, U.: Atmospheric temperature change detection with GPS radio
occultation 1995 to 2008, Geophys. Res. Lett., 36, L18702,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GL039777" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2009GL039777</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>Steiner, A. K., Lackner, B. C., Ladstädter, F., Scherllin-Pirscher, B.,
Foelsche, U., and Kirchengast, G.: GPS radio occultation for climate
monitoring and change detection, Radio Sci., 46, RS0D24,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010RS004614" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2010RS004614</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>Steiner, A. K., Hunt, D., Ho, S.-P., Kirchengast, G., Mannucci, A. J., Scherllin-Pirscher, B., Gleisner, H., von Engeln, A., Schmidt, T.,
Ao, C., Leroy, S. S., Kursinski, E. R., Foelsche, U., Gorbunov, M., Heise, S., Kuo, Y.-H., Lauritsen, K. B., Marquardt, C., Rocken, C.,
Schreiner, W., Sokolovskiy, S., Syndergaard, S., and Wickert, J.: Quantification of structural uncertainty in climate data records from
GPS radio occultation, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 1469–1484, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-1469-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-13-1469-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>Syndergaard, S.: Modeling the impact of the Earth's oblateness on the
retrieval of temperature and pressure profiles from limb sounding, J. Atmos.
Sol.-Terr. Phys., 60, 171–180, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6826(97)00056-4" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/S1364-6826(97)00056-4</ext-link>, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>
Syndergaard, S.: Retrieval analysis and methodologies in atmospheric limb
sounding using the GNSS radio occultation technique, DMI Sci. Rep. 99-6,
Danish Meteorol. Inst., Copenhagen, Denmark, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>Syndergaard, S.: On the ionosphere calibration in GPS radio occultation
measurements, Radio Sci., 35, 865–883, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/1999rs002199" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/1999rs002199</ext-link>, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>
Vorob'ev, V. V. and Krasil'nikova, T. G.: Estimation of the accuracy of the
atmospheric refractive index recovery from Doppler shift measurements at
frequencies used in the NAVSTAR system, Phys. Atmos. Ocean, 29, 602–609,
1994.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Analysis of ionospheric structure influences on residual ionospheric errors in GNSS radio occultation bending angles based on ray tracing simulations</article-title-html>
<abstract-html><p>The Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) radio occultation (RO)
technique is widely used to observe the atmosphere for applications such as
numerical weather prediction and global climate monitoring. The ionosphere is
a major error source to RO at upper stratospheric altitudes, and a linear
dual-frequency bending angle correction is commonly used to remove the
first-order ionospheric effect. However, the higher-order residual
ionospheric error (RIE) can still be significant, so it needs to be
further mitigated for high-accuracy applications, especially from 35&thinsp;km
altitude upward, where the RIE is most relevant compared to the decreasing
magnitude of the atmospheric bending angle. In a previous study we quantified
RIEs using an ensemble of about 700 quasi-realistic end-to-end simulated RO
events, finding typical RIEs at the 0.1 to 0.5&thinsp;µrad noise level, but
were left with 26 exceptional events with anomalous RIEs at the 1 to 10&thinsp;µrad level that remained unexplained. In this study, we focused on
investigating the causes of the high RIE of these exceptional events,
employing detailed along-ray-path analyses of atmospheric and ionospheric
refractivities, impact parameter changes, and bending angles and RIEs under
asymmetric and symmetric ionospheric structures. We found that the main
causes of the high RIEs are a combination of physics-based effects – where
asymmetric ionospheric conditions play the primary role, more than the
ionization level driven by solar activity – and technical ray tracer effects
due to occasions of imperfect smoothness in ionospheric refractivity model
derivatives. We also found that along-ray impact parameter variations of more
than 10 to 20&thinsp;m are possible due to ionospheric asymmetries and,
depending on prevailing horizontal refractivity gradients, are positive or
negative relative to the initial impact parameter at the GNSS transmitter.
Furthermore, mesospheric RIEs are found generally higher than
upper-stratospheric ones, likely due to being closer in tangent point heights to
the ionospheric <i>E</i> layer peaking near 105&thinsp;km, which increases RIE
vulnerability. In the future we will further improve the along-ray modeling
system to fully isolate technical from physics-based effects and to use it
beyond this work for additional GNSS RO signal propagation studies.</p></abstract-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
Angerer, B., Ladstädter, F., Scherllin-Pirscher, B., Schwärz, M., Steiner, A. K., Foelsche, U., and Kirchengast, G.:
Quality aspects of the Wegener Center multi-satellite GPS radio occultation record OPSv5.6, Atmos. Meas. Tech.,
10, 4845–4863, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-10-4845-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-10-4845-2017</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
Angling, M. J., Elvidge, S., and Healy, S. B.: Improved model for correcting the ionospheric impact on bending angle in radio
occultation measurements, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 11, 2213–2224, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-2213-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-2213-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
Anthes, R. A.: Exploring Earth's atmosphere with radio occultation: contributions to weather, climate and space weather,
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 4, 1077–1103, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-4-1077-2011" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-4-1077-2011</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
Bassiri, S. and Hajj, G. A.: Higher-order ionospheric effects on the GPS
observables and means of modeling them, Manuscr. Geodaet., 18, 280–289, 1993.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
Budden, K. G.: The propagation of radio waves: the theory of radio waves of
low power in the ionosphere and magnetosphere, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, 1985.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
Coleman, C. J. and Forte, B.: On the residual ionospheric error in radio
occultation measurements, Radio Sci., 52, 918–937, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016RS006239" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2016RS006239</a>,
2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
Danzer, J., Scherllin-Pirscher, B., and Foelsche, U.: Systematic residual ionospheric errors in radio occultation data
and a potential way to minimize them, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 6, 2169–2179, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-6-2169-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-6-2169-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
Danzer, J., Healy, S. B., and Culverwell, I. D.: A simulation study with a new residual ionospheric error model for GPS
radio occultation climatologies, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 8, 3395–3404, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-8-3395-2015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-8-3395-2015</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
Edwards, P. G. and Pawlak, D.: Metop: The space segment for Eumetsat's
Polar System, ESA Bull., 102, 6–18, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
Foelsche, U., Scherllin-Pirscher, B., Ladstädter, F., Steiner, A. K., and Kirchengast, G.: Refractivity and temperature climate records
from multiple radio occultation satellites consistent within 0.05&thinsp;%, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 4, 2007–2018, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-4-2007-2011" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-4-2007-2011</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
Fritzer, J., Kirchengast, G., and Pock, M.: End-to-End Generic Occultation
Performance Simulation and Processing System version 5.6 (EGOPS 5.6)
Software User Manual, Tech. Rep. ESA-ESTEC WEGC-EGOPS-2013-TR01, Wegener
Center and Inst. for Geophys., Astrophys., and Meteorol., Univ. of Graz,
Austria, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
Gobiet, A. and Kirchengast, G.: Advancements of Global Navigation Satellite
System radio occultation retrieval in the upper stratosphere for optimal
climate monitoring utility, J. Geophys. Res., 109, D24110,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2004jd005117" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2004jd005117</a>, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
Gobiet, A., Kirchengast, G., Manney, G. L., Borsche, M., Retscher, C., and Stiller, G.: Retrieval of temperature profiles from CHAMP
for climate monitoring: intercomparison with Envisat MIPAS and GOMOS and different atmospheric analyses, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 7,
3519–3536, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-3519-2007" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-7-3519-2007</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
Gorbunov, M. E.: Ionospheric correction and statistical optimization of
radio occultation data, Radio Sci., 37, 1084, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2000rs002370" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2000rs002370</a>,
2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
Hajj, G. A., Kursinski, E. R., Romans, L. J., Bertiger, W. I., and Leroy, S.
S.: A technical description of atmospheric sounding by GPS occultation, J.
Atmos. Sol.-Terr. Phy., 64, 451–469, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6826(01)00114-6" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6826(01)00114-6</a>,
2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
Healy, S. B. and Culverwell, I. D.: A modification to the standard ionospheric correction method used in GPS radio occultation,
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 8, 3385–3393, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-8-3385-2015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-8-3385-2015</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
Hedin, A. E.: Extension of the MSIS thermosphere model into the middle and
lower atmosphere, J. Geophys. Res., 96, 1159–1172, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/90JA02125" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/90JA02125</a>,
1991.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
Ho, S.-P., Hunt, D., Steiner, A. K., Mannucci, A. J., Kirchengast, G.,
Gleisner, H., Heise, S., von Engeln, A., Marquardt, C., Sokolovskiy, S.,
Schreiner, W., Scherllin-Pirscher, B., Ao, C., Wickert, J., Syndergaard, S.,
Lauritsen, K. B., Leroy, S., Kursinski, E. R., Kuo, Y-H., Foelsche, U.,
Schmidt, T., and Gorbunov, M.: Reproducibility of GPS radio occultation data
for climate monitoring: Profile-to-profile inter-comparison of CHAMP climate
records 2002 to 2008 from six data centers, J. Geophys. Res., 117, D18111,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JD017665" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JD017665</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
Hoque, M. M. and Jakowski, N.: Higher order ionospheric propagation effects
on GPS radio occultation signals, Adv. Space Res., 46, 162–173,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2010.02.013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2010.02.013</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
Hoque, M. M. and Jakowski, N.: Ionospheric bending correction for GNSS
radio occultation signals, Radio Sci., 46, RS0D06, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010rs004583" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2010rs004583</a>,
2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
Kursinski, E. R., Hajj, G. A., Schofield, J. T., Linfield, R. P., and Hardy,
K. R.: Observing Earth's atmosphere with radio occultation measurements
using the Global Positioning System, J. Geophys. Res., 102, 23429–23465,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/97jd01569" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/97jd01569</a>, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
Lackner, B. C., Steiner, A. K., Hegerl, G. C., and Kirchengast, G.:
Atmospheric climate change detection by radio occultation data using a
fingerprinting method, J. Climate, 24, 5275–5291,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/2011JCLI3966.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/2011JCLI3966.1</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
Ladreiter, H. P. and Kirchengast, G.: GPS/GLONASS sensing of the neutral
atmosphere: Model-independent correction of ionospheric influences, Radio
Sci., 31, 877–891, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/96rs01094" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/96rs01094</a>, 1996.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
Leitinger, R. and Kirchengast, G.: Easy to use global and regional
ionospheric models – A report on approaches used in Graz, Acta Geod. Geophys.
Hu., 32, 329–342, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03325504" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03325504</a>, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
Liu, C. L., Kirchengast, G., Zhang, K. F., Norman, R., Li, Y., Zhang, S. C.,
Carter, B., Fritzer, J., Schwaerz, M., Choy, S. L., Wu, S. Q., and Tan, Z.
X.: Characterisation of residual ionospheric errors in bending angles using
GNSS RO end-to-end simulations, Adv. Space Res., 52, 821–836,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2013.05.021" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2013.05.021</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
Liu, C. L., Kirchengast, G., Zhang, K., Norman, R., Li, Y., Zhang, S. C., Fritzer, J., Schwaerz, M., Wu, S. Q., and Tan, Z. X.:
Quantifying residual ionospheric errors in GNSS radio occultation bending angles based on ensembles of profiles
from end-to-end simulations, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 8, 2999–3019, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-8-2999-2015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-8-2999-2015</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>
Loiselet, M., Stricker, N., Menard, Y., and Luntama, J.-P.: GRAS – Metop's
GPS-based atmospheric sounder, ESA Bull., 102, 38–44, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
Luntama, J.-P., Kirchengast, G., Borsche, M., Foelsche, U., Steiner, A.,
Healy, S., von Engeln, A., O'Clerigh, E., and Marquardt, C.: Prospects of
the EPS GRAS mission for operational atmospheric applications, B. Am.
Meteorol. Soc., 89, 1863–1875, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/2008BAMS2399.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/2008BAMS2399.1</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
Mannucci, A. J., Ao, C. O., Pi, X., and Iijima, B. A.: Impact of the
ionosphere on GNSS radio occultation retrievals, Presentation at the
OPAC-GRASSAF-IROWG International Workshop September 6–11, 2010, Graz
Austria, available at:
<a href="http://wegcwww.uni-graz.at/opac2010/pdf_presentation/opac_2010_mannucci_anthony_presentation71.pdf" target="_blank">http://wegcwww.uni-graz.at/opac2010/pdf_presentation/opac_2010_mannucci_anthony_presentation71.pdf</a> (last access: 23 March 2018), 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>
Mannucci, A. J., Ao, C. O., Pi, X., and Iijima, B. A.: The impact of large scale ionospheric structure on radio occultation
retrievals, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 4, 2837–2850, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-4-2837-2011" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-4-2837-2011</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
Melbourne, W. G., Davis, E. S., Duncan, C. B., Hajj, G. A., Hardy, K. R.,
Kursinski, E. R., Meehan, T. K., Yong, L. E., and Yunck, T. P.: The
application of spaceborne GPS to atmospheric limb sounding and global change
monitoring, JPL Publication 94-18, Jet Propulsion Lab., Cal. Tech.,
Pasadena, CA, 1994.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
Scherllin-Pirscher, B., Kirchengast, G., Steiner, A. K., Kuo, Y.-H., and Foelsche, U.: Quantifying uncertainty in climatological
fields from GPS radio occultation: an empirical-analytical error model, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 4, 2019–2034, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-4-2019-2011" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-4-2019-2011</a>,
2011.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
Scherllin-Pirscher, B., Steiner, A. K., Kirchengast, G., Schwaerz, M., and
Leroy, S. S.: The power of vertical geolocation of atmospheric profiles from
GNSS radio occultation, J. Geophys. Res. Atmos., 122, 1595–1616,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD025902" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD025902</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
Schwarz, J., Kirchengast, G., and Schwaerz, M.: Integrating uncertainty propagation in GNSS radio occultation retrieval:
from excess phase to atmospheric bending angle profiles, Atmos. Meas. Tech. Discuss., <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-2017-159" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-2017-159</a>, in review,
2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
Steiner, A. K. and Kirchengast, G.: Error analysis for GNSS radio
occultation data based on ensembles of profiles from end-to-end simulations,
J. Geophys. Res., 110, 1–21, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JD005251" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JD005251</a>, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>
Steiner, A. K., Kirchengast, G., Lackner, B. C., Pirscher, B., Borsche, M.,
and Foelsche, U.: Atmospheric temperature change detection with GPS radio
occultation 1995 to 2008, Geophys. Res. Lett., 36, L18702,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GL039777" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2009GL039777</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
Steiner, A. K., Lackner, B. C., Ladstädter, F., Scherllin-Pirscher, B.,
Foelsche, U., and Kirchengast, G.: GPS radio occultation for climate
monitoring and change detection, Radio Sci., 46, RS0D24,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010RS004614" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2010RS004614</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>
Steiner, A. K., Hunt, D., Ho, S.-P., Kirchengast, G., Mannucci, A. J., Scherllin-Pirscher, B., Gleisner, H., von Engeln, A., Schmidt, T.,
Ao, C., Leroy, S. S., Kursinski, E. R., Foelsche, U., Gorbunov, M., Heise, S., Kuo, Y.-H., Lauritsen, K. B., Marquardt, C., Rocken, C.,
Schreiner, W., Sokolovskiy, S., Syndergaard, S., and Wickert, J.: Quantification of structural uncertainty in climate data records from
GPS radio occultation, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 1469–1484, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-1469-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-1469-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>
Syndergaard, S.: Modeling the impact of the Earth's oblateness on the
retrieval of temperature and pressure profiles from limb sounding, J. Atmos.
Sol.-Terr. Phys., 60, 171–180, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6826(97)00056-4" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6826(97)00056-4</a>, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>
Syndergaard, S.: Retrieval analysis and methodologies in atmospheric limb
sounding using the GNSS radio occultation technique, DMI Sci. Rep. 99-6,
Danish Meteorol. Inst., Copenhagen, Denmark, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>
Syndergaard, S.: On the ionosphere calibration in GPS radio occultation
measurements, Radio Sci., 35, 865–883, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/1999rs002199" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/1999rs002199</a>, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>
Vorob'ev, V. V. and Krasil'nikova, T. G.: Estimation of the accuracy of the
atmospheric refractive index recovery from Doppler shift measurements at
frequencies used in the NAVSTAR system, Phys. Atmos. Ocean, 29, 602–609,
1994.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
