Error Correlations in High-Resolution Infrared Radiation Sounder (HIRS) Radiances
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Data and Methods
2.1. Hirs Channels and Calibration
2.2. Data Acquisition, Reading, and Pre-Processing
- For the overlaps that occur between consecutive L1B data files, we select the “best” scanline. Here, “best” is defined as the scanline that does not have the “do not use” flag set. If neither has this flag set, we choose the scanline with the fewest overall flags set. If both have the “do not use” flag set, we select neither.
- We remove any scanlines where the time is invalid, because our processing algorithm relies on valid times.
- Where scanlines occur out of sequence, we sort the scanlines by time.
- Based on the scanline number, we remove any scanlines occurring more than once.
- We remove any scanlines where different scanlines have different scanline numbers but the same scanline times.
- We remove any lines where bit flags are set for do not use, moonlight in space view, or mirror position error, as well as where radiances are negative or counts are zero.
- We skip the first eight values in each calibration line, because the mirror may not yet be aligned for space or IWCT to be in view.
- We remove outliers by masking out any calibration counts that deviate by more than 10 times the median absolute deviation from the median. For a normal distribution and under nominal circumstances, this filter removes effectively no measurements (less than a fraction of ). As an outlier filter, it is robust as long as outliers (or otherwise bad data) constitute less than 50% of unflagged data. Although we have seen orbits with more than 50% unflagged bad data, manual inspection comparing Pearson and Spearman correlation matrices has ensured no such orbits are present in the data used in this study.
- Finally, we remove any scanlines or sets of calibration views where the counts are entirely constant.
2.3. Exploring Correlations in Calibration and Earth Views
3. Results
3.1. Correlated Error
3.2. Periodic Error
3.3. Fourier Analysis
3.4. Effect on Earth Views
- TIROS-N: channels 15–17, with a period of 2.3 pixels (frequency of 1/2.3 pixels), and 16–17, period of 4.3 pixels
- Late NOAA-6: channels 15–16, period of 3.4 pixels
- Early NOAA-8: channels 1–3, period of 2.5 pixels
- NOAA-9: channels 4–6, 11, 12, period of 4 pixels
- NOAA-10: channels 2–3, period of 2.5 pixels
- NOAA-11: channels 1–3 at a period of 6.9 pixels, channel 2 at a period of 3.9 pixels, channels 1–3 at a period of 2.3 pixels
- early NOAA-12: channels 2–3, period of 2.4 pixels
- Late NOAA-16: channels 1–6, 9, 11–12 at a period of 2.3 pixels
- Late NOAA-17: channels 1–7, 9–12 at a period of 2.3 pixels
- Late NOAA-19: channels 1–4, 11-12 at a period of 2.3 pixels
- Late MetOp-A: channels 1–4 at a period of 2.3 pixels and 1–3 at a period of 5.3 pixels
- Late MetOp-B: channels 1–4, 12 at a period of 2.3 pixels
4. Discussion and Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Koenig, E.W. Final Report on the High Resolution Infrared Radiation Sounder (HIRS) for the Nimbus F Spacecraft; Technical Report; ITT Aerospace/Optical Division: Fort Wayne, IN, USA, 1975. [Google Scholar]
- English, S.J.; Renshaw, R.J.; Dibben, P.C.; Smith, A.J.; Rayer, P.J.; Poulsen, C.; Saunders, F.W.; Eyre, J.R. A comparison of the impact of TOVS and ATOVS satellite sounding data on the accuracy of numerical weather forecasts. Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc. 2000, 126, 2911–2931. [Google Scholar]
- Dee, D.P.; Uppala, S.M.; Simmons, A.J.; Berrisford, P.; Poli, P.; Kobayashi, S.; Andrae, U.; Balmaseda, M.A.; Balsamo, G.; Bauer, P.; et al. The ERA-Interim reanalysis: Configuration and performance of the data assimilation system. Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc. 2011, 137, 553–597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bates, J.J.; Jackson, D.L. Trends in upper-tropospheric humidity. Geophys. Res. Lett. 2001, 28, 1695–1698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shi, L.; Bates, J.J. Three decades of intersatellite-calibrated High-Resolution Infrared Radiation Sounder upper tropospheric water vapor. J. Geophys. Res. 2011, 116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wylie, D.P.; Menzel, W.P.; Strabala, K.I. Four years of global cirrus cloud statistics using HIRS. J. Clim. 1994, 7, 1972–1986. [Google Scholar]
- Rodgers, C.D. (Ed.) Inverse Methods for Atmospheric Sounding: Theory and Practice; World Scientific Publishing: Singapore, 2000; ISBN 10981022740X. [Google Scholar]
- Mittaz, J.; Merchant, C.J.; Wooliams, E. Applying principles of metrology to historical Earth observations from satellites. Metrologia 2019, in press. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Merchant, C.J.; Holl, G.; Mittaz, J.P.; Wooliams, E.R. Radiance uncertainty characterisation to facilitate Climate Data Record creation. Remote Sens. 2019, 11, 474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cao, C.; Jarva, K.; Ciren, P. An Improved Algorithm for the Operational Calibration of the High-Resolutino Infrared Radiation Sounder. J. Atmos. Ocean. Technol. 2007, 24, 169–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shi, L.; Bates, J.J.; Cao, C. Scene radiance-dependent intersatellite biases of HIRS longwave channels. J. Atmos. Ocean. Technol. 2008, 25, 2219–2229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shi, L. Intersatellite Differences of HIRS Longwave Channels between NOAA-14 and NOAA-15 and between NOAA-17 and METOP-A. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote 2013, 51, 1414–1424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, R.; Cao, C.; Menzel, W.P. Intersatellite calibration of NOAA HIRS CO2 channels for climate studies. J. Geophys. Res. 2013, 118, 5190–5203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Menzel, W.P.; Frey, R.A.; Borbas, E.E.; Baum, B.A.; Cureton, G.; Bearson, N. Reprocessing of HIRS Satellite Measurements from 1980 to 2015: Development toward a Consistent Decadal Cloud Record. J. Appl. Meteorol. Clim. 2016, 55, 2397–2410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gierens, K.; Eleftheratos, K.; Sausen, R. Intercalibration between HIRS/2 and HIRS/3 channel 12 based on physical considerations. Atmos. Meas. Tech. 2018, 11, 939–948. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Robel, J.; Graumann, A.; Kidwell, K.; Aleman, R.; Goodrum, G.; Mo, T.; Ruff, I.; Askew, J.; Graumann, A.; Muckle, B.; et al. NOAA KLM User’s Guide with NOAA-N, -N’ Supplement; Technical Report; National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service, National Climatic Data Center, Remote Sensing and Applications Division: Silver Spring, MD, USA, 2014.
- Kidwell, K.B. NOAA Polar Orbiter Data User’s Guide; Technical Report; National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: Asheville, NC, USA, 1997.
- Pearson, K. Notes on regression and inheritance in the case of two parents. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. 1895, 58, 240–242. [Google Scholar]
- Fourier, J.B.J. Mémoire sur les Temperature du Global Terrestre et de Espace Planétaires. Mémoire de l’Académie Royale des Sciences de l’Institut de France 1827, 7, 570–604. [Google Scholar]
- Fallah, B.; Saberi, A.A.; Sodoudi, S. Emergence of global scaling behaviour in the coupled Earth-atmosphere interaction. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 34005. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Allan, D.W. Statistics of atomic frequency standards. Proc. IEEE 1966, 54, 221–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Holl, G.; Mittaz, J.; Merchant, C.J. Timeseries of noise characteristics and instrument error correlations for the High Resolution Infrared Radiation Sounder on the NOAA-15 satellite. Figshare 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Walt, S.V.D.; Colbert, S.C.; Varoquaux, G. The NumPy array: A structure for efficient numerical computation. Comput. Sci. Eng. 2011, 13, 22–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jones, E.; Oliphant, T.; Peterson, P. SciPy: Open source scientific tools for Python. 2001. [Google Scholar]
- Hunter, J.D. Matplotlib: A 2D graphics environment. Comput. Sci. Eng. 2007, 9, 90–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Generation | Satellite | Start | End |
---|---|---|---|
HIRS/2 | TIROS-N | 29 October 1978 | 30 January 1980 |
HIRS/2 | NOAA-6/A | 30 June 1979 | 05 March 1983 |
HIRS/2 | NOAA-7/C | 24 August 1981 | 31 December 1984 |
HIRS/2 | NOAA-8/E | 03 May 1983 | 14 October 1985 |
HIRS/2 | NOAA-9/F | 25 February 1985 | 07 November 1988 |
HIRS/2 | NOAA-10/G | 25 November 1986 | 16 September 1991 |
HIRS/2I | NOAA-11/H | 08 November 1988 | 31 December 1998 |
HIRS/2 | NOAA-12/D | 16 September 1991 | 14 December 1998 |
HIRS/2I | NOAA-14/J | 01 January 1995 | 10 October 2006 |
HIRS/3 | NOAA-15/K | 01 January 1999 | — |
HIRS/3 | NOAA-16/L | 01 January 2001 | 05 June 2014 |
HIRS/3 | NOAA-17/M | 10 July 2002 | 09 April 2013 |
HIRS/4 | NOAA-18/N | 05 June 2005 | — |
HIRS/4 | NOAA-19/N’ | 01 April 2009 | — |
HIRS/4 | MetOp-A | 21 November 2006 | — |
HIRS/4 | MetOp-B | 15 January 2013 | — |
Ch. | Wl [μm] | Ch. | Wl [μm] | Ch. | Wl [μm] |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
HgCdTe | InSb | Si | |||
1 | 14.95 | 13 | 4.57 | 20 | 0.69 |
2 | 14.70 | 14 | 4.52 | ||
3 | 14.47 | 15 | 4.67 | ||
4 | 14.21 | 16 | 4.42 | ||
5 | 13.95 | 17 | 4.18 | ||
6 | 13.65 | 18 | 3.97 | ||
7 | 13.34 | 19 | 3.76 | ||
8 | 11.11 | ||||
9 | 9.71 | ||||
10 | 8.2/12.47 1 | ||||
11 | 7.33 | ||||
12 | 6.7/6.52 1 |
HgCdTe | InSb | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Early | Late | Early | Late | |
TN | Peak at 9.6 pixels in all except 6, 9, 11. | Broad peak at 6.9–9.6 pixels. | Strong peak at 2.3 pixels. Peaks at 3.4, 4.3, and 9.6 pixels. | |
N6 | Peak at 2.3 and 6 pixels. Weak peak at 9.6 pixels in channels 7 and 10. | Peak at 2.3 pixels only. | Weak peak at 3.4 pixels for all except 17. | Amplitude decreased by factor of approximately 3. Peak at 2.3 pixels. Strong peak at 3.4 pixels for all except 17. Weak peak at 9.6 pixels. |
N7 | Weak peak at 2.3 pixels. Weak peak at 6 pixels, channels 1–3, 5, 6. | Weak peak at 2.3 pixels. Weak peak at 6 pixels, channels 1–3, 5, 6. Weak peak at 16 pixels in channels 1–6 | Mostly flat, weak peak at 3.4 pixels in channels 14, 15, 17. | Peak at 2.1 pixels. Peak at 2.5 pixels. Broad peak at 3.4–4 pixels. Peak at 6.9 pixels, strength varies per channel. Peak at 16 pixels. |
N8 | Peak at 2.5 pixels. Peak at 3.2 pixels (channel 1 only). | Peak at 2.2 pixels. Weak peak at 3–3.2 pixels (channels 6 and 10). Peak at 6 pixels. Weak peak at 24 pixels. | Peak at 2.3 pixels. Peak at 3.4 pixels (except channel 14). Peak at 4.8 pixels. Peak at 6.9 pixels. | Peak at 2.3 pixels. Peak at 3.4 pixels (except channel 14). Peak at 4.4 pixels. Peak at 6.9 pixels. Weak peak at 24 pixels. |
N9 | Very strong peak at 4 pixels. Peak at 12 pixels. | Weak peak at 3 pixels. Very strong peak at 4 pixels. Broad peak at 12–16 pixels. | Weak peak at 4 pixels (except channel 17). | Weak peak at 12 pixels, a bit stronger in space than in IWCT. |
N10 | Weak peaks at 2–3 pixels and broad peak at 6.9 pixels (channels 1–7, 11–12). Weak, broad peak near 3 pixels (channels 8–10). | Weak, broad peak at 3 pixels in channel 19. Otherwise mostly flat. | ||
N11 | Peak at 2.3 pixels, strength varies per channel. Peak at 3.7 pixels (channels 2, 4–6). Strong peak at 6.9 pixels. | As for early, except that peak at 3.7 pixels has disappeared. | Peak at 2.3 pixels (channels 13–17). Peak at 6.9 pixels. Peak at 9.6 pixels (channels 14–17). | As for early, but with a weaker peak at 6.9 pixels. The peak at 9.6 pixels is now also visible in channel 19. |
N12 | Peak at 2.4 pixels (channels 1–7). Broad peak at 6.9 pixels (channels 1–7). Varying weak peaks at 2–3 pixels (channels 8–12). Broad peak at 3 pixels stronger for IWCT than space (channel 8 only). | Amplitude increased by factor of approximately 10. Mostly flat between 48 and 4.8 pixels, decreasing amplitude at 4.8–2 pixels. | Mostly flat. | Mostly flat between 48 and 4.8 pixels, decreasing amplitude at 4.8–2 pixels. |
N14 | Mostly flat. | Mostly flat. | Mostly flat. | Slight variations in channel 16 only. |
HgCdTe | InSb | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Early | Late | Early | Late | |
N15 | Mostly flat. | Power increased by nearly 3 orders of magnitude. Power decreases with frequency. Power in space stronger than in IWCT, in particular for lower frequencies. Dominates Earth counts for all channels. | Power increases with frequency. | Power increased by 2–3 orders of magnitude. Power decreases with frequency. Power in space stronger than in IWCT, especially for channels 14 and 18, but not for channel 19. |
N16 | Weak peak at 12 pixels | Several peaks at 2–7 pixels. Peak at 2.3 pixels particularly strong in channel 9. | Weak peak at 9.6 pixels in channels 13–16, otherwise flat. | Amplitude increased by factor 2–3. Peaks very similar to HgCdTe channels. |
N17 | Weak peak at 2.8 pixels, channel 10 only, otherwise flat. | Amplitude increased by factor 5–10. Strong peak at 2.3 pixels, affects Earth for all except channel 8. Broad peaks at 4.8 and at 12 pixels. | Flat. | Peaks as for HgCdTe but less strong. |
N18 | Peak at 3.7 pixels, stronger in IWCT than space. Peak at 2.3 pixels. | Mostly flat, slight increase at highest frequencies. | Weak peaks at 2.3, 2.7, and 9.6 pixels | |
N19 | Weak ups and downs throughout range. | As early data, but with peak at 2.3 pixels varying per strength | Flat. | Peak at 2.3 pixels. |
MA | Oscillatory with peaks at 2.3, 3.2, 5.3 pixels. | Flat. | Peaks at 2.3, 6.3, 16 pixels. | |
MB | Peak at 4 pixels, broad peaks at 4.8–5.3 and at 12–16 pixels | Strong peak at 2.3 pixels, peaks at 5.3 pixels and 3.7–4 pixels. | Flat | Flat |
© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Holl, G.; Mittaz, J.P.D.; Merchant, C.J. Error Correlations in High-Resolution Infrared Radiation Sounder (HIRS) Radiances. Remote Sens. 2019, 11, 1337. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11111337
Holl G, Mittaz JPD, Merchant CJ. Error Correlations in High-Resolution Infrared Radiation Sounder (HIRS) Radiances. Remote Sensing. 2019; 11(11):1337. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11111337
Chicago/Turabian StyleHoll, Gerrit, Jonathan P. D. Mittaz, and Christopher J. Merchant. 2019. "Error Correlations in High-Resolution Infrared Radiation Sounder (HIRS) Radiances" Remote Sensing 11, no. 11: 1337. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11111337