Search NASA⌕ Search

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.

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

At least 73 records · Page 4
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2003

Estimation of Model Error Variances During Data Assimilation

Data assimilation is all about understanding the error characteristics of the data and models that are used in the assimilation process. Reliable error estimates are needed to implement observational quality control, bias correction of observations and model fields, and intelligent data selection. Meaningful covariance specifications are obviously required for the analysis as well, since the impact of any single observation strongly depends on the assumed structure of the background errors. Operational atmospheric data assimilation systems still rely primarily on climatological background error covariances. To obtain error estimates that reflect both the character of the flow and the current state of the observing system, it is necessary to solve three problems: (1) how to account for the short-term evolution of errors in the initial conditions; (2) how to estimate the additional component of error caused by model defects; and (3) how to compute the error reduction in the analysis due to observational information. Various approaches are now available that provide approximate solutions to the first and third of these problems. However, the useful accuracy of these solutions very much depends on the size and character of the model errors and the ability to account for them. Model errors represent the real-world forcing of the error evolution in a data assimilation system. Clearly, meaningful model error estimates and/or statistics must be based on information external to the model itself. The most obvious information source is observational, and since the volume of available geophysical data is growing rapidly, there is some hope that a purely statistical approach to model error estimation can be viable. This requires that the observation errors themselves are well understood and quantifiable. We will discuss some of these challenges and present a new sequential scheme for estimating model error variances from observations in the context of an atmospheric data assimilation system.

Dee, Dick↗
DOE OSTI2026

Concatenated dual displacement code for continuous-variable quantum error correction

The continuous-variable (CV) Gaussian no-go theorem fundamentally limits the suppression of Gaussian displacement errors using only Gaussian gates and states. Prior studies have employed Gottesman-Kitaev-Preskill (GKP) states as ancillary qumodes to suppress small Gaussian displacement errors. However, when the displacement magnitude becomes large, inevitable lattice-crossing errors arise beyond the correctable range of the GKP state. To address this issue, we concatenate the Gaussian-noise-suppression circuit with an outer analog Steane code that corrects such occasional lattice-crossing events as well as other abrupt displacement errors. Contrary to conventional concatenation, which primarily aims to reduce logical error rates, the Steane-GKP duality in encoding provides complementary protection against displacement errors at different scales: The inner GKP layer employs non-Gaussian resources to suppress continuous Gaussian noise and reduce residual variance, while the outer analog Steane code corrects discrete lattice-crossing events that exceed the GKP correctable range. It is precisely this separation of error-mitigation roles that enables CV error correction. In contrast to prior work on concatenating GKP and repetition codes to establish error correction for discrete qubit/qudit encoding, we provide correction in the continuous encoding space. Analytical studies show that, under infinite squeezing, the concatenated code suppresses the variance of Gaussian displacement errors acting on all qumodes by up to 50%, while enabling unbiased correction of lattice-crossing errors with a success probability determined by the ratio between the residual Gaussian error standard deviation and the lattice-crossing magnitude. Even with finite squeezing, the proposed architecture still provides Gaussian-error suppression and lattice-crossing correction. Moreover, the presence of the outer analog Steane code relaxes the squeezing requirement of the inner GKP states, indicating near-term experimental feasibility. This work establishes a viable route toward fault-tolerant continuous-variable quantum computation and provides insight into the design of concatenated CV error-correcting architectures.

quantum error correction↗
NASA NTRS2018

An Accurate Method for Correcting Spectral Convolution Errors in Intercalibration of Broadband and Hyperspectral Sensors

The intercalibration between a broadband and a hyperspectral satellite Earth observation system requires the convolution of the hyperspectral data with the spectral response functions (SRFs) of the corresponding broadband channels. There are two potential issues associated with the convolution procedure. First, the finite resolution of a hyperspectral spectrum, that is, the deviation from the highly accurate line-by-line monochromatic radiances, will contribute to convolution errors. The magnitude of the errors depends on the spectral resolution and the SRF shape of the hyperspectral instrument. This type of the convolution error has not been well recognized, and there is a lack of corresponding discussion in most published papers. Although it is small as compared with the instrument accuracy of existing hyperspectral sounders, the error is deemed to be signicant when it is compared with the stringent calibration requirement imposed by future climate missions like the Climate Absolute Radiance and Refractivity Observatory (CLARREO). Second, some broadband channels are insufficiently covered by the hyperspectral data, causing spectral gaps that lead to convolution errors. Although several methods have been developed to fill the spectral gaps and hence compensate for the second type of convolution error, the correction accuracy may still need improvement especially when a large spectral gap needs to be lled. This paper presents a methodology to accurately quantify and compensate for both types of convolution errors. This methodology utilizes the available hyperspectral information to correct the scene-dependent convolution errors due to either the limited spectral resolution or spectral gaps. We use simulations to characterize the intercalibration errors between the Moderate resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) and current operational infrared sounders. We demonstrate that convolution errors can be effectively removed to meet the highly accurate intersatellite calibration requirement proposed by the Climate Absolute Radiance and Refractivity Observatory. Our methodology is also validated using real satellite data for the intercalibration between Aqua MODIS and Aqua Atmospheric Infrared Sounders (AIRS). Our study demonstrates that the accurate characterization and correction for the convolution errors greatly reduces the scene-dependent and spectrally dependent errors, being critical to the consistency check between Infrared Atmospheric Sounding Interferometer (IASI) and AIRS using the double-difference method. The convolution correction also facilitates the evaluation for other intercalibration errors (e.g., the drift of MODIS SRFs). Our derived SRF shift values from MODIS-AIRS (after convolution error corrections) and from MODIS-IASI intercalibration are consistent with each other. We further extend the methodology to study the calibration of a broadband channel which is either completely or largely uncovered bya hyperspectral measurement.The large spectral gap-filling methodology is validated by demonstrating the accurate prediction of the MODIS radiance of band 29 using the Cross-track Infrared Sounder spectra, with the real IASI spectral data being used as the reference.

Correction Method↗
DOE OSTI2024

Characterizing non-Markovian and coherent errors in quantum simulation

Quantum simulation of many-body systems, particularly using ultracold atoms and trapped ions, presents a unique form of quantum control—it is a direct implementation of a multi-qubit gate generated by the Hamiltonian. As a consequence, it also faces a unique challenge in terms of benchmarking, because the well-established gate benchmarking techniques are unsuitable for this form of quantum control. Here we show that the symmetries of the target many-body Hamiltonian can be used not only to benchmark but to characterize experimental errors in the quantum simulation. We use our results to develop protocols to characterize these errors, which can be implemented using state-of-the-art technology. We consider two forms of errors: (i) unitary errors arising out of systematic errors in the applied Hamiltonian and (ii) canonical non-Markovian errors arising out of random shot-to-shot fluctuations in the applied Hamiltonian. We show that the dynamics of the expectation value of the target Hamiltonian itself, which is ideally constant in time, can be used to characterize these errors. In the presence of errors, the expectation value of the target Hamiltonian shows a characteristic thermalization dynamics, when it satisfies the operator thermalization hypothesis (OTH). That is, an oscillation in the short time followed by relaxation to a steady-state value in the long time limit. We show that while the steady-state value can be used to characterize the coherent errors, the amplitude of the oscillations can be used to estimate the non-Markovian errors. We prove a sandwich theorem to establish a linear relation between the amplitude of the oscillations and the magnitude of the non-Markovian errors. Moreover, by varying the initial state, we show that the steady state values can be used to completely construct the generator of the coherent errors. Using these results, we develop two experimental protocols to characterize the unitary errors based on these results, one of which requires single-qubit addressing and the other one doesn't. We also develop a protocol to characterize non-Markovian errors. Published by the American Physical Society 2024

71 CLASSICAL AND QUANTUM MECHANICS, GENERAL PHYSIC↗
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.↗
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↗
NASA NTRS2016

Performance Metrics, Error Modeling, and Uncertainty Quantification

A common set of statistical metrics has been used to summarize the performance of models or measurements-­ the most widely used ones being bias, mean square error, and linear correlation coefficient. They assume linear, additive, Gaussian errors, and they are interdependent, incomplete, and incapable of directly quantifying un­certainty. The authors demonstrate that these metrics can be directly derived from the parameters of the simple linear error model. Since a correct error model captures the full error information, it is argued that the specification of a parametric error model should be an alternative to the metrics-based approach. The error-modeling meth­odology is applicable to both linear and nonlinear errors, while the metrics are only meaningful for linear errors. In addition, the error model expresses the error structure more naturally, and directly quantifies uncertainty. This argument is further explained by highlighting the intrinsic connections between the performance metrics, the error model, and the joint distribution between the data and the reference.

Quantification↗
NASA NTRS1986

At least some errors are randomly generated (Freud was wrong)

An experiment was carried out to expose something about human error generating mechanisms. In the context of the experiment, an error was made when a subject pressed the wrong key on a computer keyboard or pressed no key at all in the time allotted. These might be considered, respectively, errors of substitution and errors of omission. Each of seven subjects saw a sequence of three digital numbers, made an easily learned binary judgement about each, and was to press the appropriate one of two keys. Each session consisted of 1,000 presentations of randomly permuted, fixed numbers broken into 10 blocks of 100. One of two keys should have been pressed within one second of the onset of each stimulus. These data were subjected to statistical analyses in order to probe the nature of the error generating mechanisms. Goodness of fit tests for a Poisson distribution for the number of errors per 50 trial interval and for an exponential distribution of the length of the intervals between errors were carried out. There is evidence for an endogenous mechanism that may best be described as a random error generator. Furthermore, an item analysis of the number of errors produced per stimulus suggests the existence of a second mechanism operating on task driven factors producing exogenous errors. Some errors, at least, are the result of constant probability generating mechanisms with error rate idiosyncratically determined for each subject.

Sellen, A. J.↗
NASA NTRS1990

Procedural error monitoring and smart checklists

Human beings make and usually detect errors routinely. The same mental processes that allow humans to cope with novel problems can also lead to error. Bill Rouse has argued that errors are not inherently bad but their consequences may be. He proposes the development of error-tolerant systems that detect errors and take steps to prevent the consequences of the error from occurring. Research should be done on self and automatic detection of random and unanticipated errors. For self detection, displays should be developed that make the consequences of errors immediately apparent. For example, electronic map displays graphically show the consequences of horizontal flight plan entry errors. Vertical profile displays should be developed to make apparent vertical flight planning errors. Other concepts such as energy circles could also help the crew detect gross flight planning errors. For automatic detection, systems should be developed that can track pilot activity, infer pilot intent and inform the crew of potential errors before their consequences are realized. Systems that perform a reasonableness check on flight plan modifications by checking route length and magnitude of course changes are simple examples. Another example would be a system that checked the aircraft's planned altitude against a data base of world terrain elevations. Information is given in viewgraph form.

Palmer, Everett↗
NASA NTRS1993

Radio metric errors due to mismatch and offset between a DSN antenna beam and the beam of a troposphere calibration instrument

Two components of the error of a troposphere calibration measurement were quantified by theoretical calculations. The first component is a beam mismatch error, which occurs when the calibration instrument senses a conical volume different from the cylindrical volume sampled by a Deep Space Network (DSN) antenna. The second component is a beam offset error, which occurs if the calibration instrument is not mounted on the axis of the DSN antenna. These two error sources were calculated for both delay (e.g., VLBI) and delay rate (e.g., Doppler) measurements. The beam mismatch error for both delay and delay rate drops rapidly as the beamwidth of the troposphere calibration instrument (e.g., a water vapor radiometer or an infrared Fourier transform spectrometer) is reduced. At a 10-deg elevation angle, the instantaneous beam mismatch error is 1.0 mm for a 6-deg beamwidth and 0.09 mm for a 0.5-deg beam (these are the full angular widths of a circular beam with uniform gain out to a sharp cutoff). Time averaging for 60-100 sec will reduce these errors by factors of 1.2-2.2. At a 20-deg elevation angle, the lower limit for current Doppler observations, the beam-mismatch delay rate error is an Allan standard deviation over 100 sec of 1.1 x 10(exp -14) with a 4-deg beam and 1.3 x 10(exp -l5) for a 0.5-deg beam. A 50-m beam offset would result in a fairly modest (compared to other expected error sources) delay error (less than or equal to 0.3 mm for 60-sec integrations at any elevation angle is greater than or equal to 6 deg). However, the same offset would cause a large error in delay rate measurements (e.g., an Allan standard deviation of 1.2 x 10(exp -14) over 100 sec at a 20-deg elevation angle), which would dominate over other known error sources if the beamwidth is 2 deg or smaller. An on-axis location is essential for accurate troposphere calibration of delay rate measurements. A half-power beamwidth (for a beam with a tapered gain profile) of 1.2 deg or smaller is desired for calibration of all types of radio metrics. A water-vapor radiometer calibration beam of this size with very low sidelobes would require a clear aperture antenna with a diameter of at least 1.5 m if the primary water vapor sensing channel were in the 20-22 GHz range.

R P Linfield↗