Intercomparison of Measurement Techniques Workshop

Scott Palo, University of Colorado, palo@colorado.edu
Skaggs 2A-305, 1:00-3:00 PM
Friday, June 30, 2000

Motiviation:

It has become clear in recent years that future progress in understanding the coupled Mesosphere/Lower-Thermosphere-Ionosphere (MLTI) system will require the integration of diverse data sets from many different types of instruments located across the globe and in space.

Assimilation of these data into a coherent result requires accurate knowledge of

  1. Potential biases associated with specific measured and derived quantities (eq. temperature, winds, composition, emission rate, density, etc),
  2. The random stochastic fluctuations associated with a given measured or derived atmospheric quantity, both the atmospheric and instrumental contribution are of interest,
  3. The coherence or correlation scale for a given atmospheric parameter over a range of time and spatial scales.

It is necessary to have some knowledge of the random and systematic errors associated with all measured atmospheric parameters used in any global analysis technique. Without such information the validity of such analysis methods are questionable. Results from recent intercomparison studies in the mesosphere and lower-thermosphere have not provided clear answers about the errors and biases associated with specific measured quantities or measuring techniques. One often-quoted reason is that "the two instruments are not measuring the same volume of space at the same time", this is also referred to as the apples and oranges argument. Therefore to make progress with these comparisons we must consider the question "How well do we expect two measurements of the same atmospheric parameter to agree?" To get a handle on this question we must attempt to define the correlation structure for each measured parameter over short time and spatial scales.

Workshop Goal:

It is the goal of this workshop to bring together experimentalists and modelers to discuss the problem of random and systematic measurement errors.

The following questions will be addressed

  1. What are the outstanding issues concerning measurement intercomparisons?
  2. Are some methods for intercomparison better than others?
  3. Do we need to take a stochastic rather than deterministic view of the MLTI?
  4. Where can we make progress on this issue or what has been done and what still needs to be done?

Schedule:

A short 15 minute presentation on previous studies and the current status of measurement intercomparisons will be made to bring people up to speed and to stimulate discussion. The remainder of the workshop will provide an open forum for the discussion of ideas on how we should progress. If you are interested in making a short presentation on this topic please let me know so that I can accommodate your needs.

Back to CEDAR Agenda 2000