Published August 29, 2023 | Version Published
Journal Article Open

Retrieving 3D distributions of atmospheric particles using Atmospheric Tomography with 3D Radiative Transfer – Part 2: Local optimization

  • 1. ROR icon University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign
  • 2. ROR icon California Institute of Technology
  • 3. ROR icon Technion – Israel Institute of Technology
  • 4. ROR icon Jet Propulsion Lab

Abstract

Our global understanding of clouds and aerosols relies on the remote sensing of their optical, microphysical, and macrophysical properties using, in part, scattered solar radiation. Current retrievals assume clouds and aerosols form plane-parallel, homogeneous layers and utilize 1D radiative transfer (RT) models. These assumptions limit the detail that can be retrieved about the 3D variability in the cloud and aerosol fields and induce biases in the retrieved properties for highly heterogeneous structures such as cumulus clouds and smoke plumes. In Part 1 of this two-part study, we validated a tomographic method that utilizes multi-angle passive imagery to retrieve 3D distributions of species using 3D RT to overcome these issues. That validation characterized the uncertainty in the approximate Jacobian used in the tomographic retrieval over a wide range of atmospheric and surface conditions for several horizontal boundary conditions. Here, in Part 2, we test the algorithm's effectiveness on synthetic data to test whether the retrieval accuracy is limited by the use of the approximate Jacobian. We retrieve 3D distributions of a volume extinction coefficient (σ3D) at 40 m resolution from synthetic multi-angle, mono-spectral imagery at 35 m resolution derived from stochastically generated cumuliform-type clouds in (1 km)3 domains. The retrievals are idealized in that we neglect forward-modelling and instrumental errors, with the exception of radiometric noise; thus, reported retrieval errors are the lower bounds. σ3D is retrieved with, on average, a relative root mean square error (RRMSE) < 20 % and bias < 0.1 % for clouds with maximum optical depth (MOD) < 17, and the RRMSE of the radiances is < 0.5 %, indicating very high accuracy in shallow cumulus conditions. As the MOD of the clouds increases to 80, the RRMSE and biases in σ3D worsen to 60 % and 35 %, respectively, and the RRMSE of the radiances reaches 16 %, indicating incomplete convergence. This is expected from the increasing ill-conditioning of the inverse problem with the decreasing mean free path predicted by RT theory and discussed in detail in Part 1. We tested retrievals that use a forward model that is not only less ill-conditioned (in terms of condition number) but also less accurate, due to more aggressive delta-M scaling. This reduces the radiance RRMSE to 9 % and the bias in σ3D to 8 % in clouds with MOD  80, with no improvement in the RRMSE of σ3D. This illustrates a significant sensitivity of the retrieval to the numerical configuration of the RT model which, at least in our circumstances, improves the retrieval accuracy. All of these ensemble-averaged results are robust in response to the inclusion of radiometric noise during the retrieval. However, individual realizations can have large deviations of up to 18 % in the mean extinction in clouds with MOD  80, which indicates large uncertainties in the retrievals in the optically thick limit. Using less ill-conditioned forward model tomography can also accurately infer optical depths (ODs) in conditions spanning the majority of oceanic cumulus fields (MOD < 80), as the retrieval provides ODs with bias and RRMSE values better than 8 % and 36 %, respectively. This is a significant improvement over retrievals using 1D RT, which have OD biases between 30 % and 23 % and RRMSE between 29 % and 80 % for the clouds used here. Prior information or other sources of information will be required to improve the RRMSE of σ3D in the optically thick limit, where the RRMSE is shown to have a strong spatial structure that varies with the solar and viewing geometry.

Copyright and License

© Author(s) 2023. This work is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Published by Copernicus Publications on behalf of the European Geosciences Union.

Acknowledgement

The authors would like to thank Frank Evans for making his SHDOM code publicly available and the two anonymous referees for their valuable comments. Yoav Y. Schechner is the Mark and Diane Seiden chair in science at the Technion. He is a Landau Fellow and has been supported by the Taub Foundation. His work was conducted in the Ollendorff Minerva Center, which is funded through the BMBF. The authors are grateful to the U.S.–Israel Binational Science Foundation (BSF; grant no. 2016325) for facilitating our international collaboration.

Funding

Jesse Loveridge has been supported by NASA's FINESST programme (grant no. 80NSSC20K1633). Aviad Levis has been partially supported by the Zuckerman and Viterbi postdoctoral fellowships. This research was partially carried out at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under a contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA; grant no. 80NM0018D0004). Anthony B. Davis has been supported by the ROSES NRA programme element (grant no. TASNPP17-0165). Larry Di Girolamo has been supported by the MISR project through the Jet Propulsion Laboratory of the California Institute of Technology (contract no. 1474871) and by NASA's ACCDAM program (contract no. 80NSSC21K1449). Linda Forster has been funded by the European Union's Framework Programme for Research and Innovation Horizon 2020 (2014–2020), under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions (grant no. 754388; LMUResearchFellows), and from LMUexcellent, funded by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) and the Free State of Bavaria under the Excellence Strategy of the German Federal Government and States. This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation programme (grant no. 810370-ERC-CloudCT). This work received support from the U.S.–Israel Binational Science Foundation (BSF; grant no. 2016325), which facilitated this international collaboration.

Contributions

L performed the investigation and prepared the initial draft under the supervision of LDG. JL, LDG, YYS, ABD, and AL conceptualized the study. JL, AL, VH, and LF developed the software. All authors contributed to the editing of the paper.

Data Availability

The stochastically generated cloud fields are available from Zenodo at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8270210 (Loveridge, 2023).

Code Availability

The software described and used in this paper is called Atmospheric Tomography with 3D Radiative Transfer (AT3D). A static archive of the software is available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7062466 (Loveridge et al., 2022). The most recent version is available from https://github.com/CloudTomography/AT3D (Loveridge et al., 2023b). The original SHDOM code by Frank Evans is available from https://nit.coloradolinux.com/~evans/shdom/shdom.tar.gz (Evans, 2023).

Additional Information

This paper was edited by Alexander Kokhanovsky and reviewed by two anonymous referees.

Files

amt-16-3931-2023.pdf

Files (5.4 MB)

Name Size Download all
md5:7ed30528d7cb7254120ebc50fefef60e
5.4 MB Preview Download

Additional details

Funding

National Aeronautics and Space Administration
80NSSC20K1633
California Institute of Technology
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
80NM0018D0004
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
TASNPP17-0165
Jet Propulsion Laboratory
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
1474871
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
80NSSC21K1449
European Commission
754388
Federal Ministry of Education and Research
European Research Council
810370
United States-Israel Binational Science Foundation
2016325

Dates

Accepted
2023-07-04
Accepted

Caltech Custom Metadata

Publication Status
Published