Articles | Volume 8, issue 7
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-1943-2015
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-1943-2015
Development and technical paper
 | 
02 Jul 2015
Development and technical paper |  | 02 Jul 2015

Pan-spectral observing system simulation experiments of shortwave reflectance and long-wave radiance for climate model evaluation

D. R. Feldman, W. D. Collins, and J. L. Paige

Related authors

Angular sampling of a monochromatic, wide-field-of-view camera to augment next-generation Earth radiation budget satellite observations
Jake J. Gristey, K. Sebastian Schmidt, Hong Chen, Daniel R. Feldman, Bruce C. Kindel, Joshua Mauss, Mathew van den Heever, Maria Z. Hakuba, and Peter Pilewskie
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 16, 3609–3630, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-16-3609-2023,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-16-3609-2023, 2023
Short summary
Sensitivities of subgrid-scale physics schemes, meteorological forcing, and topographic radiation in atmosphere-through-bedrock integrated process models: a case study in the Upper Colorado River basin
Zexuan Xu, Erica R. Siirila-Woodburn, Alan M. Rhoades, and Daniel Feldman
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 27, 1771–1789, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-1771-2023,https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-1771-2023, 2023
Short summary
Determining the daytime Earth radiative flux from National Institute of Standards and Technology Advanced Radiometer (NISTAR) measurements
Wenying Su, Patrick Minnis, Lusheng Liang, David P. Duda, Konstantin Khlopenkov, Mandana M. Thieman, Yinan Yu, Allan Smith, Steven Lorentz, Daniel Feldman, and Francisco P. J. Valero
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 13, 429–443, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-429-2020,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-429-2020, 2020
Short summary
Quantitative comparison of the variability in observed and simulated shortwave reflectance
Y. L. Roberts, P. Pilewskie, B. C. Kindel, D. R. Feldman, and W. D. Collins
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 3133–3147, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-3133-2013,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-3133-2013, 2013

Related subject area

Climate and Earth system modeling
Architectural insights into and training methodology optimization of Pangu-Weather
Deifilia To, Julian Quinting, Gholam Ali Hoshyaripour, Markus Götz, Achim Streit, and Charlotte Debus
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8873–8884, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8873-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8873-2024, 2024
Short summary
Evaluation of global fire simulations in CMIP6 Earth system models
Fang Li, Xiang Song, Sandy P. Harrison, Jennifer R. Marlon, Zhongda Lin, L. Ruby Leung, Jörg Schwinger, Virginie Marécal, Shiyu Wang, Daniel S. Ward, Xiao Dong, Hanna Lee, Lars Nieradzik, Sam S. Rabin, and Roland Séférian
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8751–8771, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8751-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8751-2024, 2024
Short summary
Evaluating downscaled products with expected hydroclimatic co-variances
Seung H. Baek, Paul A. Ullrich, Bo Dong, and Jiwoo Lee
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8665–8681, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8665-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8665-2024, 2024
Short summary
Software sustainability of global impact models
Emmanuel Nyenah, Petra Döll, Daniel S. Katz, and Robert Reinecke
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8593–8611, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8593-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8593-2024, 2024
Short summary
fair-calibrate v1.4.1: calibration, constraining, and validation of the FaIR simple climate model for reliable future climate projections
Chris Smith, Donald P. Cummins, Hege-Beate Fredriksen, Zebedee Nicholls, Malte Meinshausen, Myles Allen, Stuart Jenkins, Nicholas Leach, Camilla Mathison, and Antti-Ilari Partanen
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8569–8592, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8569-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8569-2024, 2024
Short summary

Cited articles

Andrews, T., Gregory, J. M., Webb, M. J., and Taylor, K. E.: Forcing, feedbacks and climate sensitivity in CMIP5 coupled atmosphere-ocean climate models, Geophys. Res. Lett,, 39, L09712, https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL051607, 2012.
Armour, K. C., Bitz, C. M., and Roe, G. H.: Time-Varying Climate Sensitivity from Regional Feedbacks, J. Climate, 26, 4518–4534, https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli-d-12-00544.1, 2013.
Arnold Jr., C. P. and Dey, C. H.: Observing-systems simulation experiments: Past, present, and future, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 67, 687–695, 1986.
Aumann, H. H., Chahine, M. T., Gautier, C., Goldberg, M. D., Kalnay, E., McMillin, L. M., Revercomb, H., Rosenkranz, P., Smith, W., Staelin, D., Strow, L., and Susskind, J.: AIRS/AMSU/HSB on the Aqua mission: Design, science objectives, data products, and processing systems, IEEE T. Geosci. Remote, 41, 253–264, 2003.
Berk, A., Anderson, G. P., Acharya, P. K., Bernstein, L. S., Muratov, L., Lee, J., Fox, M., Adler-Golden, S. M., Chetwynd, J. M., Hoke, M. L., Lockwood, R. B., Gardner, J. A., Cooley, T. W., Borel, C. C., and Lewis, P. E.: MODTRAN 5: a reformulated atmospheric band model with auxiliary species and practical multiple scattering options: update, in: Defense and Security, 662–667, International Society for Optics and Photonics, https://doi.org/10.1117/12.578758, 2005.
Download
Short summary
This work describes a new type of observational simulator for directly comparing measurements and models that takes advantage of all of the information in spectrally resolved top-of-atmosphere data. It describes how to model how the spectrum of the Earth, both in the shortwave and the long wave, changes in response to climate forcings, and provides a path towards inline observational simulation for the upcoming Coupled Model Intercomparison Project – Phase 6.