Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Jin, Daeho

Publications and source records attributed to Jin, Daeho.

5 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2018

A Deterministic Self-Organizing Map Approach and its Application on Satellite Data based Cloud Type Classification

A self-organizing map (SOM) is a type of competitive artificial neural network, which projects the high dimensional input space of the training samples into a low dimensional space with the topology relations preserved. This makes SOMs supportive of organizing and visualizing complex data sets and have been pervasively used among numerous disciplines with different applications. Notwithstanding its wide applications, the self-organizing map is perplexed by its inherent randomness, which produces dissimilar SOM patterns even when being trained on identical training samples with the same parameters every time, and thus causes usability concerns for other domain practitioners and precludes more potential users from exploring SOM based applications in a broader spectrum. Motivated by this practical concern, we propose a deterministic approach as a supplement to the standard self-organizing map. In accordance with the theoretical design, the experimental results with satellite cloud data demonstrate the effective and efficient organization as well as simplification capabilities of the proposed approach.

Initialization method↗
NASA NTRS2016

Regime-Based Evaluation of Cloudiness in CMIP5 Models

The concept of Cloud Regimes (CRs) is used to develop a framework for evaluating the cloudiness of 12 fifth Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5) models. Reference CRs come from existing global International Satellite Cloud Climatology Project (ISCCP) weather states. The evaluation is made possible by the implementation in several CMIP5 models of the ISCCP simulator generating for each gridcell daily joint histograms of cloud optical thickness and cloud top pressure. Model performance is assessed with several metrics such as CR global cloud fraction (CF), CR relative frequency of occurrence (RFO), their product (long-term average total cloud amount [TCA]), cross-correlations of CR RFO maps, and a metric of resemblance between model and ISCCP CRs. In terms of CR global RFO, arguably the most fundamental metric, the models perform unsatisfactorily overall, except for CRs representing thick storm clouds. Because model CR CF is internally constrained by our method, RFO discrepancies yield also substantial TCA errors. Our findings support previous studies showing that CMIP5 models underestimate cloudiness. The multi-model mean performs well in matching observed RFO maps for many CRs, but is not the best for this or other metrics. When overall performance across all CRs is assessed, some models, despite their shortcomings, apparently outperform Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) cloud observations evaluated against ISCCP as if they were another model output. Lastly, cloud simulation performance is contrasted with each model's equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) in order to gain insight on whether good cloud simulation pairs with particular values of this parameter.

cloud climatology↗
NASA NTRS2016

Simplified ISCCP Cloud Regimes for Evaluating Cloudiness in CMIP5 Models

We take advantage of the ISCCP simulator implemented in many CMIP5 models, in order to introduce a credible method to compare model cloud output with corresponding ISCCP observations based on the cloud regime (CR) concept. A novel simplified CR derivation method is introduced that exploits the co-variations of three variables, cloud optical thickness, cloud top pressure and cloud fraction (, pc, CF). Following evaluation criteria established in a previous paper of ours, we assess model cloud simulation performance based on how well the simplified CRs are simulated in terms of similarity of centroids, global values and map correlations of relative frequency-of-occurrence (RFO), and long term total clouds amounts (as opposed to average instantaneous cloud fractions). Mirroring prior results, modeled clouds tend to be too thick optically and not as extensive as in observations. Averaging across models does not help in this or other evaluation aspects, except for cloud geographical locations. A good model for one criterion is usually found to be also a good performer for other criteria despite plenty of exceptions for the criterion of centroid similarity. On the other hand, CRs that include convectively generated high-altitude clouds are not as well simulated here compared to the previous study, but other regimes containing low clouds with high CF improve. Models that have previously performed well distinguish themselves again here, but improvements from other models are also found. The simplified cloud evaluation method thus proves to be more forgiving while still good enough to reveal model weaknesses.

global climate models↗