3 resultados para Diagnostic Algorithm Development
em Archimer: Archive de l'Institut francais de recherche pour l'exploitation de la mer
Resumo:
The only method used to date to measure dissolved nitrate concentration (NITRATE) with sensors mounted on profiling floats is based on the absorption of light at ultraviolet wavelengths by nitrate ion (Johnson and Coletti, 2002; Johnson et al., 2010; 2013; D’Ortenzio et al., 2012). Nitrate has a modest UV absorption band with a peak near 210 nm, which overlaps with the stronger absorption band of bromide, which has a peak near 200 nm. In addition, there is a much weaker absorption due to dissolved organic matter and light scattering by particles (Ogura and Hanya, 1966). The UV spectrum thus consists of three components, bromide, nitrate and a background due to organics and particles. The background also includes thermal effects on the instrument and slow drift. All of these latter effects (organics, particles, thermal effects and drift) tend to be smooth spectra that combine to form an absorption spectrum that is linear in wavelength over relatively short wavelength spans. If the light absorption spectrum is measured in the wavelength range around 217 to 240 nm (the exact range is a bit of a decision by the operator), then the nitrate concentration can be determined. Two different instruments based on the same optical principles are in use for this purpose. The In Situ Ultraviolet Spectrophotometer (ISUS) built at MBARI or at Satlantic has been mounted inside the pressure hull of a Teledyne/Webb Research APEX and NKE Provor profiling floats and the optics penetrate through the upper end cap into the water. The Satlantic Submersible Ultraviolet Nitrate Analyzer (SUNA) is placed on the outside of APEX, Provor, and Navis profiling floats in its own pressure housing and is connected to the float through an underwater cable that provides power and communications. Power, communications between the float controller and the sensor, and data processing requirements are essentially the same for both ISUS and SUNA. There are several possible algorithms that can be used for the deconvolution of nitrate concentration from the observed UV absorption spectrum (Johnson and Coletti, 2002; Arai et al., 2008; Sakamoto et al., 2009; Zielinski et al., 2011). In addition, the default algorithm that is available in Satlantic sensors is a proprietary approach, but this is not generally used on profiling floats. There are some tradeoffs in every approach. To date almost all nitrate sensors on profiling floats have used the Temperature Compensated Salinity Subtracted (TCSS) algorithm developed by Sakamoto et al. (2009), and this document focuses on that method. It is likely that there will be further algorithm development and it is necessary that the data systems clearly identify the algorithm that is used. It is also desirable that the data system allow for recalculation of prior data sets using new algorithms. To accomplish this, the float must report not just the computed nitrate, but the observed light intensity. Then, the rule to obtain only one NITRATE parameter is, if the spectrum is present then, the NITRATE should be recalculated from the spectrum while the computation of nitrate concentration can also generate useful diagnostics of data quality.
Resumo:
The Ocean Model Intercomparison Project (OMIP) aims to provide a framework for evaluating, understanding, and improving the ocean and sea-ice components of global climate and earth system models contributing to the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6). OMIP addresses these aims in two complementary manners: (A) by providing an experimental protocol for global ocean/sea-ice models run with a prescribed atmospheric forcing, (B) by providing a protocol for ocean diagnostics to be saved as part of CMIP6. We focus here on the physical component of OMIP, with a companion paper (Orr et al., 2016) offering details for the inert chemistry and interactive biogeochemistry. The physical portion of the OMIP experimental protocol follows that of the interannual Coordinated Ocean-ice Reference Experiments (CORE-II). Since 2009, CORE-I (Normal Year Forcing) and CORE-II have become the standard method to evaluate global ocean/sea-ice simulations and to examine mechanisms for forced ocean climate variability. The OMIP diagnostic protocol is relevant for any ocean model component of CMIP6, including the DECK (Diagnostic, Evaluation and Characterization of Klima experiments), historical simulations, FAFMIP (Flux Anomaly Forced MIP), C4MIP (Coupled Carbon Cycle Climate MIP), DAMIP (Detection and Attribution MIP), DCPP (Decadal Climate Prediction Project), ScenarioMIP (Scenario MIP), as well as the ocean-sea ice OMIP simulations. The bulk of this paper offers scientific rationale for saving these diagnostics.
Resumo:
The Ocean Model Intercomparison Project (OMIP) is an endorsed project in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6). OMIP addresses CMIP6 science questions, investigating the origins and consequences of systematic model biases. It does so by providing a framework for evaluating (including assessment of systematic biases), understanding, and improving ocean, sea-ice, tracer, and biogeochemical components of climate and earth system models contributing to CMIP6. Among the WCRP Grand Challenges in climate science (GCs), OMIP primarily contributes to the regional sea level change and near-term (climate/decadal) prediction GCs. OMIP provides (a) an experimental protocol for global ocean/sea-ice models run with a prescribed atmospheric forcing; and (b) a protocol for ocean diagnostics to be saved as part of CMIP6. We focus here on the physical component of OMIP, with a companion paper (Orr et al., 2016) detailing methods for the inert chemistry and interactive biogeochemistry. The physical portion of the OMIP experimental protocol follows the interannual Coordinated Ocean-ice Reference Experiments (CORE-II). Since 2009, CORE-I (Normal Year Forcing) and CORE-II (Interannual Forcing) have become the standard methods to evaluate global ocean/sea-ice simulations and to examine mechanisms for forced ocean climate variability. The OMIP diagnostic protocol is relevant for any ocean model component of CMIP6, including the DECK (Diagnostic, Evaluation and Characterization of Klima experiments), historical simulations, FAFMIP (Flux Anomaly Forced MIP), C4MIP (Coupled Carbon Cycle Climate MIP), DAMIP (Detection and Attribution MIP), DCPP (Decadal Climate Prediction Project), ScenarioMIP, HighResMIP (High Resolution MIP), as well as the ocean/sea-ice OMIP simulations.