SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Error”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 199 records · Page 11

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS1994

An error covariance model for sea surface topography and velocity derived from TOPEX/POSEIDON altimetry

In order to facilitate the use of satellite-derived sea surface topography and velocity oceanographic models, methodology is presented for deriving the total error covariance and its geographic distribution from TOPEX/POSEIDON measurements. The model is formulated using a parametric model fit to the altimeter range observations. The topography and velocity modeled with spherical harmonic expansions whose coefficients are found through optimal adjustment to the altimeter range residuals using Bayesian statistics. All other parameters, including the orbit, geoid, surface models, and range corrections are provided as unadjusted parameters. The maximum likelihood estimates and errors are derived from the probability density function of the altimeter range residuals conditioned with a priori information. Estimates of model errors for the unadjusted parameters are obtained from the TOPEX/POSEIDON postlaunch verification results and the error covariances for the orbit and the geoid, except for the ocean tides. The error in the ocean tides is modeled, first, as the difference between two global tide models and, second, as the correction to the present tide model, the correction derived from the TOPEX/POSEIDON data. A formal error covariance propagation scheme is used to derive the total error. Our global total error estimate for the TOPEX/POSEIDON topography relative to the geoid for one 10-day period is found tio be 11 cm RMS. When the error in the geoid is removed, thereby providing an estimate of the time dependent error, the uncertainty in the topography is 3.5 cm root mean square (RMS). This level of accuracy is consistent with direct comparisons of TOPEX/POSEIDON altimeter heights with tide gauge measurements at 28 stations. In addition, the error correlation length scales are derived globally in both east-west and north-south directions, which should prove useful for data assimilation. The largest error correlation length scales are found in the tropics. Errors in the velocity field are smallest in midlatitude regions. For both variables the largest errors caused by uncertainty in the geoid. More accurate representations of the geoid await a dedicated geopotential satellite mission. Substantial improvements in the accuracy of ocean tide models are expected in the very near future from research with TOPEX/POSEIDON data.

Tsaoussi, Lucia S.↗

NASA NTRS2011

Determination of Barometric Altimeter Errors for the Orion Exploration Flight Test-1 Entry

The EFT-1 mission is the unmanned flight test for the upcoming Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV). During entry, the EFT-1 vehicle will trigger several Landing and Recovery System (LRS) events, such as parachute deployment, based on onboard altitude information. The primary altitude source is the filtered navigation solution updated with GPS measurement data. The vehicle also has three barometric altimeters that will be used to measure atmospheric pressure during entry. In the event that GPS data is not available during entry, the altitude derived from the barometric altimeter pressure will be used to trigger chute deployment for the drogues and main parachutes. Therefore it is important to understand the impact of error sources on the pressure measured by the barometric altimeters and on the altitude derived from that pressure. There are four primary error sources impacting the sensed pressure: sensor errors, Analog to Digital conversion errors, aerodynamic errors, and atmosphere modeling errors. This last error source is induced by the conversion from pressure to altitude in the vehicle flight software, which requires an atmosphere model such as the US Standard 1976 Atmosphere model. There are several secondary error sources as well, such as waves, tides, and latencies in data transmission. Typically, for error budget calculations it is assumed that all error sources are independent, normally distributed variables. Thus, the initial approach to developing the EFT-1 barometric altimeter altitude error budget was to create an itemized error budget under these assumptions. This budget was to be verified by simulation using high fidelity models of the vehicle hardware and software. The simulation barometric altimeter model includes hardware error sources and a data-driven model of the aerodynamic errors expected to impact the pressure in the midbay compartment in which the sensors are located. The aerodynamic model includes the pressure difference between the midbay compartment and the free stream pressure as a function of altitude, oscillations in sensed pressure due to wake effects, and an acoustics model capturing fluctuations in pressure due to motion of the passive vents separating the barometric altimeters from the outside of the vehicle.

Brown, Denise L.↗

DOE OSTI2014

SU-E-T-195: Gantry Angle Dependency of MLC Leaf Position Error

Purpose: The aim of this study was to investigate the gantry angle dependency of the multileaf collimator (MLC) leaf position error. Methods: An automatic MLC quality assurance system (AutoMLCQA) was developed to evaluate the gantry angle dependency of the MLC leaf position error using an electronic portal imaging device (EPID). To eliminate the EPID position error due to gantry rotation, we designed a reference maker (RM) that could be inserted into the wedge mount. After setting up the EPID, a reference image was taken of the RM using an open field. Next, an EPID-based picket-fence test (PFT) was performed without the RM. These procedures were repeated at every 45° intervals of the gantry angle. A total of eight reference images and PFT image sets were analyzed using in-house software. The average MLC leaf position error was calculated at five pickets (-10, -5, 0, 5, and 10 cm) in accordance with general PFT guidelines using in-house software. This test was carried out for four linear accelerators. Results: The average MLC leaf position errors were within the set criterion of <1 mm (actual errors ranged from -0.7 to 0.8 mm) for all gantry angles, but significant gantry angle dependency was observed in all machines. The error was smaller at a gantry angle of 0° but increased toward the positive direction with gantry angle increments in the clockwise direction. The error reached a maximum value at a gantry angle of 90° and then gradually decreased until 180°. In the counter-clockwise rotation of the gantry, the same pattern of error was observed but the error increased in the negative direction. Conclusion: The AutoMLCQA system was useful to evaluate the MLC leaf position error for various gantry angles without the EPID position error. The Gantry angle dependency should be considered during MLC leaf position error analysis.

07 ISOTOPE AND RADIATION SOURCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

SU-E-T-789: Validation of 3DVH Accuracy On Quantifying Delivery Errors Based On Clinical Relevant DVH Metrics

Purpose: Detection of treatment delivery errors is important in radiation therapy. However, accurate quantification of delivery errors is also of great importance. This study aims to evaluate the 3DVH software’s ability to accurately quantify delivery errors. Methods: Three VMAT plans (prostate, H&N and brain) were randomly chosen for this study. First, we evaluated whether delivery errors could be detected by gamma evaluation. Conventional per-beam IMRT QA was performed with the ArcCHECK diode detector for the original plans and for the following modified plans: (1) induced dose difference error up to ±4.0% and (2) control point (CP) deletion (3 to 10 CPs were deleted) (3) gantry angle shift error (3 degree uniformly shift). 2D and 3D gamma evaluation were performed for all plans through SNC Patient and 3DVH, respectively. Subsequently, we investigated the accuracy of 3DVH analysis for all cases. This part evaluated, using the Eclipse TPS plans as standard, whether 3DVH accurately can model the changes in clinically relevant metrics caused by the delivery errors. Results: 2D evaluation seemed to be more sensitive to delivery errors. The average differences between ECLIPSE predicted and 3DVH results for each pair of specific DVH constraints were within 2% for all three types of error-induced treatment plans, illustrating the fact that 3DVH is fairly accurate in quantifying the delivery errors. Another interesting observation was that even though the gamma pass rates for the error plans are high, the DVHs showed significant differences between original plan and error-induced plans in both Eclipse and 3DVH analysis. Conclusion: The 3DVH software is shown to accurately quantify the error in delivered dose based on clinically relevant DVH metrics, where a conventional gamma based pre-treatment QA might not necessarily detect.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2016

SU-F-J-208: Prompt Gamma Imaging-Based Prediction of Bragg Peak Position for Realistic Treatment Error Scenarios

Purpose: To quantify the accuracy in predicting the Bragg peak position using simulated in-room measurements of prompt gamma (PG) emissions for realistic treatment error scenarios that combine several sources of errors. Methods: Prompt gamma measurements by a knife-edge slit camera were simulated using an experimentally validated analytical simulation tool. Simulations were performed, for 143 treatment error scenarios, on an anthropomorphic phantom and a pencil beam scanning plan for nasal cavity. Three types of errors were considered: translation along each axis, rotation around each axis, and CT-calibration errors with magnitude ranging respectively, between −3 and 3 mm, −5 and 5 degrees, and between −5 and +5%. We investigated the correlation between the Bragg peak (BP) shift and the horizontal shift of PG profiles. The shifts were calculated between the planned (reference) position and the position by the error scenario. The prediction error for one spot was calculated as the absolute difference between the PG profile shift and the BP shift. Results: The PG shift was significantly and strongly correlated with the BP shift for 92% of the cases (p<0.0001, Pearson correlation coefficient R>0.8). Moderate but significant correlations were obtained for all cases that considered only CT-calibration errors and for 1 case that combined translation and CT-errors (p<0.0001, R ranged between 0.61 and 0.8). The average prediction errors for the simulated scenarios ranged between 0.08±0.07 and 1.67±1.3 mm (grand mean 0.66±0.76 mm). The prediction error was moderately correlated with the value of the BP shift (p=0, R=0.64). For the simulated scenarios the average BP shift ranged between −8±6.5 mm and 3±1.1 mm. Scenarios that considered combinations of the largest treatment errors were associated with large BP shifts. Conclusion: Simulations of in-room measurements demonstrate that prompt gamma profiles provide reliable estimation of the Bragg peak position for complex error scenarios. Yafei Xing and Luiza Bondar are funded by BEWARE grants from the Walloon Region. The work presents simulations results for a prompt gamma camera prototype developed by IBA.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2016

SU-F-T-471: Simulated External Beam Delivery Errors Detection with a Large Area Ion Chamber Transmission Detector

Purpose: The Integral Quality Monitor (IQM), developed by iRT Systems GmbH (Koblenz, Germany) is a large-area, linac-mounted ion chamber used to monitor photon fluence during patient treatment. Our previous work evaluated the change of the ion chamber’s response to deviations from static 1×1 cm2 and 10×10 cm2 photon beams and other characteristics integral to use in external beam detection. The aim of this work is to simulate two external beam radiation delivery errors, quantify the detection of simulated errors and evaluate the reduction in patient harm resulting from detection. Methods: Two well documented radiation oncology delivery errors were selected for simulation. The first error was recreated by modifying a wedged whole breast treatment, removing the physical wedge and calculating the planned dose with Pinnacle TPS (Philips Radiation Oncology Systems, Fitchburg, WI). The second error was recreated by modifying a static-gantry IMRT pharyngeal tonsil plan to be delivered in 3 unmodulated fractions. A radiation oncologist evaluated the dose for simulated errors and predicted morbidity and mortality commiserate with the original reported toxicity, indicating that reported errors were approximately simulated. The ion chamber signal of unmodified treatments was compared to the simulated error signal and evaluated in Pinnacle TPS again with radiation oncologist prediction of simulated patient harm. Results: Previous work established that transmission detector system measurements are stable within 0.5% standard deviation (SD). Errors causing signal change greater than 20 SD (10%) were considered detected. The whole breast and pharyngeal tonsil IMRT simulated error increased signal by 215% and 969%, respectively, indicating error detection after the first fraction and IMRT segment, respectively. Conclusion: The transmission detector system demonstrated utility in detecting clinically significant errors and reducing patient toxicity/harm in simulated external beam delivery. Future work will evaluate detection of other smaller magnitude delivery errors.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2022

Analytic error analysis of cross section interpolation methods in nodal diffusion codes - II: Numerical results

This paper is the second part of a two-part paper that documents the numerical results for the partial derivatives model presented in part I. In this paper, we derive the error bounds for the analytical point-wise error expression and verify our bounds with numerical experiments. The point-wise error expressions make available, and bound, the sources that contribute to the total error of the interpolated cross section in terms of the Lagrange interpolation errors and the model form error. MPACT is used to generate two-group homogenized cross sections for Westinghouse's AP1000 Region 4 lattice to evaluate the accuracy of the bounds. Error bounds calculated over a grid are compared to numerical data for uni-variate and multi-variate interpolation. The point-wise error bounds of a typical case matrix - two branches in each state variable - are displayed for bi-variate interpolation in the state variables: moderator density, fuel temperature, and boron concentration. The error bounds are shown to be highly accurate compared to numerical results, and in accordance with the underlying physics. We then discuss and show how the sources of error contribute to the total error, and consider the improvement of each error source. Finally, we mention future work such as propagating our cross section error bounds through a reactivity calculation. (authors)

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

DOE OSTI2013

A posteriori error estimators for the discrete ordinates approximation of the one-speed neutron transport equation

When calculating numerical solutions of the neutron transport equation it is important to have a measure of the accuracy of the solution. As the true solution is generally not known, a suitable estimation of the error must be made. The steady state transport equation possesses discretization errors in all its independent variables: angle, energy and space. In this work only spatial discretization errors are considered. An exact transport solution, in which the degree of regularity of the exact flux across the singular characteristic is controlled, is manufactured to determine the numerical solutions true discretization error. This solution is then projected onto a Legendre polynomial space in order to form an exact solution on the same basis space as the numerical solution, Discontinuous Galerkin Finite Element Method (DGFEM), to enable computation of the true error. Over a series of test problems the true error is compared to the error estimated by: Ragusa and Wang (RW), residual source (LER) and cell discontinuity estimators (JD). The validity and accuracy of the considered estimators are primarily assessed by considering the effectivity index and global L2 norm of the error. In general RW excels at approximating the true error distribution but usually under-estimates its magnitude; the LER estimator emulates the true error distribution but frequently over-estimates the magnitude of the true error; the JD estimator poorly captures the true error distribution and generally under-estimates the error about singular characteristics but over-estimates it elsewhere. (authors)

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2012

Quality Assurance Analysis of a Large Multicenter Practice: Does Increased Complexity of Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy Lead to Increased Error Frequency?

Purpose: Error reduction is an important concern in clinical medicine. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) is an important advancement in radiation oncology that increases the complexity of treatment, potentially increasing the error risk. We studied the frequency and severity of errors in a large multicenter practice to ascertain the impact of quality improvement interventions over time, IMRT, and type of practice. Methods and Materials: We analyzed prospective data from three academic and 16 community practice sites with 24,775 courses of radiotherapy (9,210 IMRT courses and 15,565 non-IMRT) between January 2006 and December 2009. All IMRT treatment was performed using one centralized dose planning center for all sites. Results: We prospectively identified various errors or potential errors in 0.14 % vs. 0.40 % of the IMRT vs. non-IMRT courses (13/9,210 vs. 62/15,565, p = 0.0004) and excluding potential errors: 0.03 % for IMRT vs. 0.21% for non-IMRT. We developed the Clinical Radiotherapy Error Severity Scale (CRESS) to classify error severity from 1 to 10, with 1 to 3 for potential or completely correctable errors, 4 to 5 for dose variations <5%, and 6 to 10 for dose variations >5%. Multivariate analyses of CRESS values, severity >4, and any error (including potential) correlated significantly reduced errors with IMRT (p = 0.0001-0.0024) but found no significant difference between the academic and community practice sites and no change in error frequency over time despite implementation of 39 system-wide policy changes by the centralized quality improvement committee. Conclusions: Despite the increase in complexity with IMRT compared with conventional radiotherapy, it can be delivered with reduced error frequency.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗

DOE OSTI2016

Compiler-Directed Soft Error Detection and Recovery to Avoid DUE and SDC via Tail-DMR

This article presents Clover, a compiler-directed soft error detection and recovery scheme for lightweight soft error resilience. The compiler carefully generates soft-error-tolerant code based on idempotent processing without explicit checkpoints. During program execution, Clover relies on a small number of acoustic wave detectors deployed in the processor to identify soft errors by sensing the wave made by a particle strike. To cope with DUEs (detected unrecoverable errors) caused by the sensing latency of error detection, Clover leverages a novel selective instruction duplication technique called tail-DMR (dual modular redundancy) that provides a region-level error containment. Once a soft error is detected by either the sensors or the tail-DMR, Clover takes care of the error as in the case of exception handling. To recover from the error, Clover simply redirects program control to the beginning of the code region where the error is detected. The experimental results demonstrate that the average runtime overhead is only 26%, which is a 75% reduction compared to that of the state-of-the-art soft error resilience technique. In addition, this article evaluates an alternative technique called tail-wait, comparing it to Clover. According to the evaluation with the different processor configurations and the various error detection latencies, Clover turns out to be a superior technique, achieving 1.06 to 3.49× speedup over the tail-wait.

Computer Science↗

NASA NTRS1985

An experimental evaluation of error seeding as a program validation technique

A previously reported experiment in error seeding as a program validation technique is summarized. The experiment was designed to test the validity of three assumptions on which the alleged effectiveness of error seeding is based. Errors were seeded into 17 functionally identical but independently programmed Pascal programs in such a way as to produce 408 programs, each with one seeded error. Using mean time to failure as a metric, results indicated that it is possible to generate seeded errors that are arbitrarily but not equally difficult to locate. Examination of indigenous errors demonstrated that these are also arbitrarily difficult to locate. These two results support the assumption that seeded and indigenous errors are approximately equally difficult to locate. However, the assumption that, for each type of error, all errors are equally difficult to locate was not borne out. Finally, since a seeded error occasionally corrected an indigenous error, the assumption that errors do not interfere with each other was proven wrong. Error seeding can be made useful by taking these results into account in modifying the underlying model.

Knight, J. C.↗

NASA NTRS2000

Global Warming Estimation from MSU: Correction for Drift and Calibration Errors

Microwave Sounding Unit (MSU) radiometer observations in Ch 2 (53.74 GHz), made in the nadir direction from sequential, sun-synchronous, polar-orbiting NOAA morning satellites (NOAA 6, 10 and 12 that have approximately 7am/7pm orbital geometry) and. afternoon satellites (NOAA 7, 9, 11 and 14 that have approximately 2am/2pm orbital geometry) are analyzed in this study to derive global temperature trend from 1980 to 1998. In order to remove the discontinuities between the data of the successive satellites and to get a continuous time series, first we have used shortest possible time record of each satellite. In this way we get a preliminary estimate of the global temperature trend of 0.21 K/decade. However, this estimate is affected by systematic time-dependent errors. One such error is the instrument calibration error eo. This error can be inferred whenever there are overlapping measurements made by two satellites over an extended period of time. From the available successive satellite data we have taken the longest possible time record of each satellite to form the time series during the period 1980 to 1998 to this error eo. We find eo can decrease the global temperature trend by approximately 0.07 K/decade. In addition there are systematic time dependent errors ed and ec present in the data that are introduced by the drift in the satellite orbital geometry. ed arises from the diurnal cycle in temperature and ec is the drift related change in the calibration of the MSU. In order to analyze the nature of these drift related errors the multi-satellite Ch 2 data set is partitioned into am and pm subsets to create two independent time series. The error ed can be assessed in the am and pm data of Ch 2 on land and can be eliminated. Observation made in the MSU Ch 1 (50.3 GHz) support this approach. The error ec is obvious only in the difference between the pm and am observations of Ch 2 over the ocean. We have followed two different paths to assess the impact of the error ec on the global temperature trend. In one path the entire error ec is placed in the am data while in the other it is placed in the pm data. Global temperature trend is increased or decreased by approximately 0.03 K/decade depending upon this placement. Taking into account all random errors and systematic errors our analysis of MSU observations leads us to conclude that a conservative estimate of the global warming is 0. 11 (+/-) 0.04 K/decade during 1980 to 1998.

Prabhakara, C.↗

NASA NTRS2000

Global Warming Estimation from MSU: Correction for Drift and Calibration Errors

Microwave Sounding Unit (MSU) radiometer observations in Ch 2 (53.74 GHz), made in the nadir direction from sequential, sun-synchronous, polar-orbiting NOAA morning satellites (NOAA 6, 10 and 12 that have about 7am/7pm orbital geometry) and afternoon satellites (NOAA 7, 9, 11 and 14 that have about 2am/2pm orbital geometry) are analyzed in this study to derive global temperature trend from 1980 to 1998. In order to remove the discontinuities between the data of the successive satellites and to get a continuous time series, first we have used shortest possible time record of each satellite. In this way we get a preliminary estimate of the global temperature trend of 0.21 K/decade. However, this estimate is affected by systematic time-dependent errors. One such error is the instrument calibration error. This error can be inferred whenever there are overlapping measurements made by two satellites over an extended period of time. From the available successive satellite data we have taken the longest possible time record of each satellite to form the time series during the period 1980 to 1998 to this error. We find we can decrease the global temperature trend by about 0.07 K/decade. In addition there are systematic time dependent errors present in the data that are introduced by the drift in the satellite orbital geometry arises from the diurnal cycle in temperature which is the drift related change in the calibration of the MSU. In order to analyze the nature of these drift related errors the multi-satellite Ch 2 data set is partitioned into am and pm subsets to create two independent time series. The error can be assessed in the am and pm data of Ch 2 on land and can be eliminated. Observations made in the MSU Ch 1 (50.3 GHz) support this approach. The error is obvious only in the difference between the pm and am observations of Ch 2 over the ocean. We have followed two different paths to assess the impact of the errors on the global temperature trend. In one path the entire error is placed in the am data while in the other it is placed in the pm data. Global temperature trend is increased or decreased by about 0.03 K/decade depending upon this placement. Taking into account all random errors and systematic errors our analysis of MSU observations leads us to conclude that a conservative estimate of the global warming is 0. 11 (+-) 0.04 K/decade during 1980 to 1998.

Prabhakara, C.↗

NASA NTRS2011

Relative Effects of Trajectory Prediction Errors on the AAC Autoresolver

Trajectory prediction is fundamental to automated separation assurance. Every missed alert, false alert and loss of separation can be traced to one or more errors in trajectory prediction. These errors are a product of many different sources including wind prediction errors, inferred pilot intent errors, surveillance errors, navigation errors and aircraft weight estimation errors. This study analyzes the impact of six different types of errors on the performance of an automated separation assurance system composed of a geometric conflict detection algorithm and the Advanced Airspace Concept Autoresolver resolution algorithm. Results show that, of the error sources considered in this study, top-of-descent errors were the leading contributor to missed alerts and failed resolution maneuvers. Descent-speed errors were another significant contributor, as were cruise-speed errors in certain situations. The results further suggest that increasing horizontal detection and resolution standards are not effective strategies for mitigating these types of error sources.

Lauderdale, Todd↗

NASA NTRS2011

Quantifying Errors in TRMM-Based Multi-Sensor QPE Products Over Land in Preparation for GPM

Determining uncertainties in satellite-based multi-sensor quantitative precipitation estimates over land of fundamental importance to both data producers and hydro climatological applications. ,Evaluating TRMM-era products also lays the groundwork and sets the direction for algorithm and applications development for future missions including GPM. QPE uncertainties result mostly from the interplay of systematic errors and random errors. In this work, we will synthesize our recent results quantifying the error characteristics of satellite-based precipitation estimates. Both systematic errors and total uncertainties have been analyzed for six different TRMM-era precipitation products (3B42, 3B42RT, CMORPH, PERSIANN, NRL and GSMap). For systematic errors, we devised an error decomposition scheme to separate errors in precipitation estimates into three independent components, hit biases, missed precipitation and false precipitation. This decomposition scheme reveals hydroclimatologically-relevant error features and provides a better link to the error sources than conventional analysis, because in the latter these error components tend to cancel one another when aggregated or averaged in space or time. For the random errors, we calculated the measurement spread from the ensemble of these six quasi-independent products, and thus produced a global map of measurement uncertainties. The map yields a global view of the error characteristics and their regional and seasonal variations, reveals many undocumented error features over areas with no validation data available, and provides better guidance to global assimilation of satellite-based precipitation data. Insights gained from these results and how they could help with GPM will be highlighted.

Peters-Lidard, Christa D.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Characterization of OCO-2 and ACOS-GOSAT biases and errors for flux estimates

We characterize the magnitude of seasonally and spatially varying biases in the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2 (OCO-2) Version 8 (v8) and the Atmospheric CO2 Observations from Space (ACOS) Greenhouse Gas Observing SATellite (GOSAT) version 7.3 (v7.3) satellite CO2 retrievals by comparisons to measurements collected by the Total Carbon Column Observing Network (TCCON), Atmospheric Tomography (ATom) experiment, and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Earth System Research Laboratory (ESRL) and U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) aircraft, and surface stations. Although the ACOS-GOSAT estimates of the column averaged carbon dioxide (CO2) dry air mole fraction (XCO2) have larger random errors than the OCO-2 XCO2 estimates, and the space-based estimates over land have larger random errors than those over ocean, the systematic errors are similar across both satellites and surface types, 0.6 ± 0.1 ppm. We find similar estimates of systematic error whether dynamic versus geometric coincidences or ESRL/DOE aircraft versus TCCON are used for validation (over land), once validation and co-location errors are accounted for. We also find that areas with sparse throughput of good quality data (due to quality flags and preprocessor selection) over land have ~double the error of regions of high-throughput of good quality data. We characterize both raw and bias-corrected results, finding that bias correction improves systematic errors by a factor of 2 for land observations and improves errors by ~0.2 ppm for ocean. We validate the lowermost tropospheric (LMT) product for OCO-2 and ACOS-GOSAT by comparison to aircraft and surface sites, finding systematic errors of ~1.1 ppm, while having 2-3 times the variability of XCO2. We characterize the time and distance scales of correlations for OCO-2 XCO2 errors, and find error correlations on scales of 0.3 degrees, 5-10 degrees, and 60 days. We find comparable scale lengths for the bias correction term. Assimilation of the OCO-2 bias correction term is used to estimate flux errors resulting from OCO-2 seasonal biases, finding annual flux errors on the order of 0.3 and 0.4 PgC/yr for Transcom-3 ocean and land regions, respectively.

Susan S Kulawik↗

NASA NTRS2022

How Well do Multisatellite Products Capture the Space-Time Dynamics of Precipitation? Part II: Building an Error Model Through Spectral System Identification

Satellite precipitation products, as all quantitative estimates, come with some inherent degree of uncertainty. To associate a quantitative value of the uncertainty to each individual estimate, error modeling is necessary. Most of the error models proposed so far compute the uncertainty as a function of precipitation intensity only, and only at one specific spatio-temporal scale. We propose a spectral error model which accounts for the neighboring space-time dynamics of precipitation into the uncertainty quantification. Systematic distortions of the precipitation signal and random errors are characterized distinctively in every frequency-wavenumber band in the Fourier domain, to accurately characterize error across scales. The systematic distortions are represented as a deterministic space-time linear filtering term. The random errors are represented as a non-stationary additive noise. The spectral error model is applied to the IMERG multi satellite precipitation product and its parameters are estimated empirically through a system identification approach using the GV-MRMS gauge-radar measurements as reference (“truth”) over the eastern United States. The filtering term is found to be essentially low-pass. While traditional error models attribute most of the error variance to random errors, it is found here that the systematic filtering term explains 48% of the error variance at the native resolution of IMERG. This fact confirms that, at high resolution, filtering effects in satellite precipitation products cannot be ignored, and that the error cannot be represented as a purely random additive or multiplicative term. An important consequence is that precipitation estimates derived from totally different sources shall not be expected to automatically have statistically independent errors.

Precipitation↗

NASA NTRS2023

Characterization of Errors in Satellite-Based HCHO/NO 2 Tropospheric Column Ratios With Respect to Chemistry, Column-to-PBL Translation, Spatial Representation, and Retrieval Uncertainties

The availability of formaldehyde (HCHO) (a proxy for volatile organic compound reactivity) and nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ) (a proxy for nitrogen oxides) tropospheric columns from ultraviolet–visible (UV–Vis) satellites has motivated many to use their ratios to gain some insights into the near-surface ozone sensitivity. Strong emphasis has been placed on the challenges that come with transforming what is being observed in the tropospheric column to what is actually in the planetary boundary layer (PBL) and near the surface; however, little attention has been paid to other sources of error such as chemistry, spatial representation, and retrieval uncertainties. Here we leverage a wide spectrum of tools and data to quantify those errors carefully. Concerning the chemistry error, a well-characterized box model constrained by more than 500 h of aircraft data from NASA's air quality campaigns is used to simulate the ratio of the chemical loss of HO 2 + RO 2 (LRO x ) to the chemical loss of NO x (LNO x ). Subsequently, we challenge the predictive power of HCHO/NO 2 ratios (FNRs), which are commonly applied in current research, in detecting the underlying ozone regimes by comparing them to LRO x /LNO x . FNRs show a strongly linear (R 2 =0.94) relationship with LRO x /LNO x , but only on the logarithmic scale. Following the baseline (i.e., ln(LRO x /LNO x ) = −1.0 ± 0.2) with the model and mechanism (CB06, r2) used for segregating NO x -sensitive from VOC-sensitive regimes, we observe a broad range of FNR thresholds ranging from 1 to 4. The transitioning ratios strictly follow a Gaussian distribution with a mean and standard deviation of 1.8 and 0.4, respectively. This implies that the FNR has an inherent 20 % standard error (1σ) resulting from not accurately describing the RO x –HO x cycle. We calculate high ozone production rates (PO 3 ) dominated by large HCHO × NO 2 concentration levels, a new proxy for the abundance of ozone precursors. The relationship between PO 3 and HCHO × NO 2 becomes more pronounced when moving towards NO x -sensitive regions due to nonlinear chemistry; our results indicate that there is fruitful information in the HCHO × NO 2 metric that has not been utilized in ozone studies. The vast amount of vertical information on HCHO and NO 2 concentrations from the air quality campaigns enables us to parameterize the vertical shapes of FNRs using a second-order rational function permitting an analytical solution for an altitude adjustment factor to partition the tropospheric columns into the PBL region. We propose a mathematical solution to the spatial representation error based on modeling isotropic semivariograms. Based on summertime-averaged data, the Ozone Monitoring Instrument (OMI) loses 12 % of its spatial information at its native resolution with respect to a high-resolution sensor like the TROPOspheric Monitoring Instrument (TROPOMI) (> 5.5 × 3.5 km 2 ). A pixel with a grid size of 216 km 2 fails at capturing ∼ 65 % of the spatial information in FNRs at a 50 km length scale comparable to the size of a large urban center (e.g., Los Angeles). We ultimately leverage a large suite of in situ and ground-based remote sensing measurements to draw the error distributions of daily TROPOMI and OMI tropospheric NO 2 and HCHO columns. At a 68 % confidence interval (1σ), errors pertaining to daily TROPOMI observations, either HCHO or tropospheric NO 2 columns, should be above 1.2–1.5 × 10 16 molec. cm −2 to attain a 20 %–30 % standard error in the ratio. This level of error is almost non-achievable with the OMI given its large error in HCHO. The satellite column retrieval error is the largest contributor to the total error (40 %–90 %) in the FNRs. Due to a stronger signal in cities, the total relative error (< 50 %) tends to be mild, whereas areas with low vegetation and anthropogenic sources (e.g., the Rocky Mountains) are markedly uncertain (> 100 %). Our study suggests that continuing development in the retrieval algorithm and sensor design and calibration is essential to be able to advance the application of FNRs beyond a qualitative metric.

Amir H. Souri↗