Theoretical insight into diagnosing observation error correlations using observation-minus-background and observation-minus-analysis statistics

To improve the quantity and impact of observations used in data assimilation it is necessary to take into account the full, potentially correlated, observation error statistics. A number of methods for estimating correlated observation errors exist, but a popular method is a diagnostic that makes use of statistical averages of observation-minus-background and observation-minus-analysis residuals. The accuracy of the results it yields is unknown as the diagnostic is sensitive to the difference between the exact background and exact observation error covariances and those that are chosen for use within the assimilation. It has often been stated in the literature that the results using this diagnostic are only valid when the background and observation error correlation length scales are well separated. Here we develop new theory relating to the diagnostic. For observations on a 1D periodic domain we are able to the show the effect of changes in the assumed error statistics used in the assimilation on the estimated observation error covariance matrix. We also provide bounds for the estimated observation error variance and eigenvalues of the estimated observation error correlation matrix. We demonstrate that it is still possible to obtain useful results from the diagnostic when the background and observation error length scales are similar. In general, our results suggest that when correlated observation errors are treated as uncorrelated in the assimilation, the diagnostic will underestimate the correlation length scale. We support our theoretical results with simple illustrative examples. These results have potential use for interpreting the derived covariances estimated using an operational system.

A new calibrated sunspot group series since 1749: statistics of active day fractions

Although the sunspot-number series have existed since the mid-19th century, they are still the subject of intense debate, with the largest uncertainty being related to the "calibration" of the visual acuity of individual observers in the past. Daisy-chain regression methods are applied to inter-calibrate the observers which may lead to significant bias and error accumulation. Here we present a novel method to calibrate the visual acuity of the key observers to the reference data set of Royal Greenwich Observatory sunspot groups for the period 1900-1976, using the statistics of the active-day fraction. For each observer we independently evaluate their observational thresholds [S_S] defined such that the observer is assumed to miss all of the groups with an area smaller than S_S and report all the groups larger than S_S. Next, using a Monte-Carlo method we construct, from the reference data set, a correction matrix for each observer. The correction matrices are significantly non-linear and cannot be approximated by a linear regression or proportionality. We emphasize that corrections based on a linear proportionality between annually averaged data lead to serious biases and distortions of the data. The correction matrices are applied to the original sunspot group records for each day, and finally the composite corrected series is produced for the period since 1748. The corrected series displays secular minima around 1800 (Dalton minimum) and 1900 (Gleissberg minimum), as well as the Modern grand maximum of activity in the second half of the 20th century. The uniqueness of the grand maximum is confirmed for the last 250 years. It is shown that the adoption of a linear relationship between the data of Wolf and Wolfer results in grossly inflated group numbers in the 18th and 19th centuries in some reconstructions.

Diagnosing observation error correlations for Doppler radar radial winds in the Met Office UKV model using observation-minus-background and observation-minus-analysis statistics

With the development of convection-permitting numerical weather prediction the efficient use of high resolution observations in data assimilation is becoming increasingly important. The operational assimilation of these observations, such as Dopplerradar radial winds, is now common, though to avoid violating the assumption of un- correlated observation errors the observation density is severely reduced. To improve the quantity of observations used and the impact that they have on the forecast will require the introduction of the full, potentially correlated, error statistics. In this work, observation error statistics are calculated for the Doppler radar radial winds that are assimilated into the Met Office high resolution UK model using a diagnostic that makes use of statistical averages of observation-minus-background and observation-minus-analysis residuals. This is the first in-depth study using the diagnostic to estimate both horizontal and along-beam correlated observation errors. By considering the new results obtained it is found that the Doppler radar radial wind error standard deviations are similar to those used operationally and increase as the observation height increases. Surprisingly the estimated observation error correlation length scales are longer than the operational thinning distance. They are dependent on both the height of the observation and on the distance of the observation away from the radar. Further tests show that the long correlations cannot be attributed to the use of superobservations or the background error covariance matrix used in the assimilation. The large horizontal correlation length scales are, however, in part, a result of using a simplified observation operator.