the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Evaluating Snow Microwave Radiative Transfer (SMRT) model emissivities using observations of Arctic tundra snow
Kirsty Wivell
Stuart Fox
Melody Sandells
Chawn Harlow
Richard Essery
Nick Rutter
Abstract. Improved modelling of snow emissivity is needed to improve the assimilation of surface-sensitive atmospheric sounding observations from satellites in polar regions for Numerical Weather Prediction (NWP). This paper evaluates emissivity simulated with the Snow Microwave Radiative Transfer (SMRT) model using observations of Arctic tundra snow, at frequencies between 89 and 243 GHz. Measurements of snow correlation length, density and layer thickness were used as input to SMRT, and an optimization routine was used to assess the impact of each parameter on simulations of emissivity when compared to a set of Lambertian emissivity spectra, retrieved from observations of tundra snow from three flights of the Facility for Airborne Atmospheric Measurements (FAAM) aircraft. Probability distributions returned by the optimization routine demonstrate parameter uncertainties and the sensitivity of simulations to the different snow parameters. Results showed that SMRT was capable of reproducing a range of observed emissivities between 89 and 243 GHz. Varying correlation length alone allowed SMRT to capture much of the variability in the emissivity spectra, however, overall RMSE (and MAE) decreased from 0.029 (0.018) to 0.013 (0.0078) when the thickness of the snow layers was also varied. When all three parameters were varied simulations were similarly sensitive to both correlation length and density, although the influence of density was most evident when comparing spectra from snowpacks with and without surface snow. Simulations were most sensitive to surface snow and wind slab parameters, while sensitivity to depth hoar depended on the thickness and scattering strength of layers above, demonstrating the importance of representing all three parameters for multi-layer snowpacks when modelling emissivity spectra. This work demonstrates the ability of SMRT to simulate snow emissivity at these frequencies, and is a key step in progress towards modelling emissivity for data assimilation in NWP.
Kirsty Wivell et al.
Status: open (until 29 Jun 2023)
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-878', Anonymous Referee #1, 26 May 2023
reply
Review of “Evaluating Snow Microwave Radiative Transfer (SMRT) model emissivities using observations of Arctic tundra snow” by Kirsty Wivell et al.
This is an interesting paper that uses passive microwave observations from aircraft to assess to what extent SMRT is able to model emissivity spectra using snow parameters that are within observed values from snow pits. The paper is very well written, with methods and results described concisely and thoroughly. As the paper states, the results are relevant in the context of better assimilation of passive microwave observations from satellites over snow-covered areas. The paper can be accepted subject to addressing the minor comments below.
- Section 2.1: How do the snowpack measurements relate to the aircraft measurements in terms of timing? It is mentioned that the snowpack measurements were taken between 14-22 March 2018, with the flights taking place on 16, 20, 22 March 2018. Since the paper mentions considerable changes in the snow pack between flights, the temporal collocation appears relevant.
- L 132-133: The assumption is made that T_s,eff is approximately independent of frequency. Is this really justified given the different penetration depths (as alluded to elsewhere in the paper)?
- L168-169/Table 1: Strictly, the table gives correlation length, thickness and density, rather than SSA, thickness, density and temperature. The conversion of SSA to correlation length is only introduced later in the paper which might be confusing to some readers. Correlation length is probably indeed the better quantity to show in the table, so I suggest introducing the conversion earlier.
- Sections 2.2., 3: The use of cluster mean emissivity spectra (rather than individual spectra) seems an important choice which I feel should be motivated better, including a discussion of the implications. It has important implications on the results and their interpretation:
- Presumably, it means that the RMSE & MAE shown in table 3 and elsewhere are based on 5 values (ie the 5 frequencies considered). It would be worth making this clear in the text – it’s not a very large sample to calculate statistics from. Using individual spectra would increase the sample size and produce presumably more informative statistics.
- The cluster means are necessarily smoother in frequency than some of the individual spectra shown in Fig. 3. I would expect that less structure makes it easier to find a parameter set that is able to model the spectra. So I suspect the RMSE values are a little optimistic as a result of using the cluster means as observations? An alternative would be to try and fit the individual spectra and calculate RMSEs from these results, still keeping the clustering to separate different regimes (with different demands on the modelling). This would increase the sample size and, provided RMSEs are similar, it would strengthen the finding that SMRT is capable of modelling very diverse spectra.
- Section 3: The snowpack parameter retrievals exhibit considerable differences at least for some clusters. I wonder whether these differences are backed up by the snowpack measurements. For instance, the snowpack measurements could be grouped into the 8 clusters based on the aircraft data that is most appropriate in terms of location and timing. Based on this grouping, is there a tendency for larger/smaller thickness or correlation length measurements in line with the retrieved values? I appreciate that the limited number of the pit-measurements and the heterogeneity may prevent such an analysis from being meaningful, but I would nevertheless be interested if this has been considered or attempted.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-878-RC1
Kirsty Wivell et al.
Data sets
Emissivity spectra retrieved from airborne observations collected during the MACSSIMIZE field campaign Kirsty Wivell, Stuart Fox, and Chawn Harlow https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7886630
Kirsty Wivell et al.
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
93 | 32 | 6 | 131 | 2 | 1 |
- HTML: 93
- PDF: 32
- XML: 6
- Total: 131
- BibTeX: 2
- EndNote: 1
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1