Articles | Volume 15, issue 20
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-7533-2022
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-15-7533-2022
Methods for assessment of models
 | 
17 Oct 2022
Methods for assessment of models |  | 17 Oct 2022

Recovery of sparse urban greenhouse gas emissions

Benjamin Zanger, Jia Chen, Man Sun, and Florian Dietrich

Related authors

Greenhouse gas column observations from a portable spectrometer in Uganda
Neil Humpage, Hartmut Boesch, William Okello, Jia Chen, Florian Dietrich, Mark F. Lunt, Liang Feng, Paul I. Palmer, and Frank Hase
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 5679–5707, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-5679-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-5679-2024, 2024
Short summary
Intercomparison of biogenic CO2 flux models in four urban parks in the city of Zurich
Stavros Stagakis, Dominik Brunner, Junwei Li, Leif Backman, Anni Karvonen, Lionel Constantin, Leena Järvi, Minttu Havu, Jia Chen, Sophie Emberger, and Liisa Kulmala
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2475,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2475, 2024
Short summary
Transferability of machine-learning-based global calibration models for NO2 and NO low-cost sensors
Ayah Abu-Hani, Jia Chen, Vigneshkumar Balamurugan, Adrian Wenzel, and Alessandro Bigi
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 3917–3931, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-3917-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-3917-2024, 2024
Short summary
Using a portable FTIR spectrometer to evaluate the consistency of Total Carbon Column Observing Network (TCCON) measurements on a global scale: the Collaborative Carbon Column Observing Network (COCCON) travel standard
Benedikt Herkommer, Carlos Alberti, Paolo Castracane, Jia Chen, Angelika Dehn, Florian Dietrich, Nicholas M. Deutscher, Matthias Max Frey, Jochen Groß, Lawson Gillespie, Frank Hase, Isamu Morino, Nasrin Mostafavi Pak, Brittany Walker, and Debra Wunch
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 3467–3494, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-3467-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-3467-2024, 2024
Short summary
Understanding greenhouse gas (GHG) column concentrations in Munich using the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model
Xinxu Zhao, Jia Chen, Julia Marshall, Michal Gałkowski​​​​​​​, Stephan Hachinger, Florian Dietrich, Ankit Shekhar, Johannes Gensheimer, Adrian Wenzel, and Christoph Gerbig
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 23, 14325–14347, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-14325-2023,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-23-14325-2023, 2023
Short summary

Related subject area

Atmospheric sciences
An updated aerosol simulation in the Community Earth System Model (v2.1.3): dust and marine aerosol emissions and secondary organic aerosol formation
Yujuan Wang, Peng Zhang, Jie Li, Yaman Liu, Yanxu Zhang, Jiawei Li, and Zhiwei Han
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 7995–8021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7995-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7995-2024, 2024
Short summary
Exploring ship track spreading rates with a physics-informed Langevin particle parameterization
Lucas A. McMichael, Michael J. Schmidt, Robert Wood, Peter N. Blossey, and Lekha Patel
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 7867–7888, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7867-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7867-2024, 2024
Short summary
Do data-driven models beat numerical models in forecasting weather extremes? A comparison of IFS HRES, Pangu-Weather, and GraphCast
Leonardo Olivetti and Gabriele Messori
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 7915–7962, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7915-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7915-2024, 2024
Short summary
Development of the MPAS-CMAQ coupled system (V1.0) for multiscale global air quality modeling
David C. Wong, Jeff Willison, Jonathan E. Pleim, Golam Sarwar, James Beidler, Russ Bullock, Jerold A. Herwehe, Rob Gilliam, Daiwen Kang, Christian Hogrefe, George Pouliot, and Hosein Foroutan
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 7855–7866, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7855-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7855-2024, 2024
Short summary
Assessment of object-based indices to identify convective organization
Giulio Mandorli and Claudia J. Stubenrauch
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 7795–7813, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7795-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7795-2024, 2024
Short summary

Cited articles

Baraniuk, R., Davenport, M., DeVore, R., and Wakin, M.: A simple proof of the restricted isometry property for random matrices, Constructive Approximation, 28, 253–263, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00365-007-9003-x, 2008. a
Boche, H., Calderbank, R., Kutyniok, G., and Vybíral, J.: A survey of compressed sensing, in: Compressed sensing and its applications, 1–39, Springer, 2015. a
Candès, E. J.: The restricted isometry property and its implications for compressed sensing, Comptes Rendus Mathematique, 346, 589–592, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crma.2008.03.014, 2008. a, b
Candès, E. J. and Tao, T.: Decoding by linear programming, IEEE T. Inform. Theory, 51, 4203–4215, https://doi.org/10.1109/TIT.2005.858979, 2005. a
Candès, E. J., Romberg, J. K., and Tao, T.: Stable signal recovery from incomplete and inaccurate measurements, Commun. Pure Appl. Math., 59, 1207–1223, https://doi.org/10.1002/cpa.20124, 2006. a
Download
Short summary
Gaussian priors (GPs) used in least squares inversion do not reflect the true distributions of greenhouse gas emissions well. A method that does not rely on GPs is sparse reconstruction (SR). We show that necessary conditions for SR are satisfied for cities and that the application of a wavelet transform can further enhance sparsity. We apply the theory of compressed sensing to SR. Our results show that SR needs fewer measurements and is superior for assessing unknown emitters compared to GPs.