the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Leveraging JEDI for Atmospheric Composition: A unified framework for evaluating observations and model forecasts
Abstract. Accurate evaluation of both observations and forecasts is essential for advancing atmospheric composition research and improving operational prediction. Traditionally, this has relied on separate workflows with product-specific preprocessing, often limiting reproducibility and creating inconsistencies between models and observational datasets or across different products. Modern data assimilation systems provide precise observation operators for mapping model variables into observation space, yet these capabilities remain underutilized outside assimilation. Here, we demonstrate how the Joint Effort for Data assimilation Integration (JEDI) framework addresses this gap by offering a unified, modular, and model-agnostic system that integrates data assimilation with systematic evaluation. JEDI enables consistent intercomparisons of observations, forecasts, and reanalyses by interfacing with diverse forecast models and gridded datasets, while leveraging carefully designed observation operators to compute equivalent quantities for a wide range of observation products. These include satellite instruments such as Tropospheric Emissions: Monitoring of Pollution (TEMPO), The TROPOspheric Monitoring Instrument (TROPOMI), Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS), Visible Infrared Imaging Radiometer Suite (VIIRS), and Plankton, Aerosol, Cloud, and ocean Ecosystem (PACE), as well as ground-based networks like Aerosol Robotic Network (AERONET), Pandora, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) AirNow. Case studies illustrate the flexibility of this workflow: (1) NO2 forecasts from the Weather Research and Forecasting model coupled with Chemistry (WRF-Chem) evaluated against TEMPO, TROPOMI, and Pandora retrievals; (2) surface fine particulate matter and ozone forecasts from WRF-Chem assessed against AirNow measurements using EPA regulatory thresholds; and (3) aerosol optical depth (AOD) retrievals from multiple satellites compared with Modern-Era Retrospective analysis for Research and Applications, Version 2 (MERRA-2) and validated against AERONET. These examples highlight JEDI’s ability to detect systematic regional biases, reconcile complementary sampling characteristics across platforms, and assess the added value of unified observation operators for cross-comparison. Overall, JEDI provides a consistent and extensible framework for model validation and observation assessment, reducing redundant preprocessing and aligning evaluation with operational data assimilation practices, and ultimately advancing both research and operational applications in atmospheric composition.
- Preprint
(2097 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: final response (author comments only)
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2025-4503', Anonymous Referee #1, 28 Oct 2025
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2025/egusphere-2025-4503/egusphere-2025-4503-RC1-supplement.pdfCitation: https://doi.org/
10.5194/egusphere-2025-4503-RC1 - AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Shih Wei Wei, 15 Jan 2026
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2025-4503', Anonymous Referee #2, 08 Dec 2025
The paper presents how the JEDI framework and associated tools can be used to evaluate the atmospheric composition models. It is interesting to see that the JEDI framework can be used beyond data assimilation. This capability of JEDI would be of interest to atmospheric chemistry researchers. It allows using JEDI in both data assimilation and verification within the same atmospheric modeling systems. The text is concise and easy to follow. I recommend publishing this manuscript after addressing the following comments:
- My main concern regarding this evaluation framework is that the authors do not show how the uncertainties are accounted for in the atmospheric composition observations. These uncertainties are taken into account in the data assimilation, but not much in model verification. For example, there are significant uncertainties in the satellite AOD observations. How can these uncertainties be taken into account in the model evaluation? This aspect of the model-observation comparison is not considered here.
- How can these tools be used to conduct object based verification?
- How about aircraft observations? For example, the observations obtained during the field campaigns.
- 160: Does CRTM allow treatment of aerosols with non-spherical shapes?
- 230: The AirNow network is run by the states.
- 275: I assume the WRF-Chem simulations used the biomass burning emissions generated sometime later. Therefore, I would not say these are “WRF-Chem forecasts,” but rather retrospective simulations. Add a Table to show the model settings, e.g. resolution, physics and chemistry schemes that were used in the WRF-Chem simulations.
- It is remarkable that the WRF-Chem model has strong underestimation of the NO2 columns over NYC. What is causing this? The emission inventories or some other model errors. How does this bias affect O3 simulations over NYC?
- The RMSE statistics: Is this the centered RMSE? If not, I suggest changing that as the bias statistics are already provided.
- Figure 5. This map does not provide much information. It would be better to replace it with two plots to show the PM2.5 and O3 bias maps.
- MERRA-2 evaluation: As it is stated, MERRA-2 is based on GEOS-5, which assimilates the AERONET observations. Therefore, it is not clear what is the purpose of the MERRA-2 evaluation using the AERONET data. The presented AOD satellite verification is quite useful.
- Figure 7: Please add the regression lines (slope and intercept)
- References: For WRF/WRF-Chem this paper should be cited too: Powers, J. G., Klemp, J. B., Skamarock, W. C., Davis, C. A., Dudhia, J., Gill, D. O., et al. (2017). THE WEATHER RESEARCH AND FORECASTING MODEL Overview, System Efforts, and Future Directions. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 98(8), 1717–1737.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-4503-RC2 - AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Shih Wei Wei, 15 Jan 2026
Data sets
Sample input and output data of "Leveraging JEDI for Atmospheric Composition: A unified framework for evaluating observations and model forecasts" Shih-Wei Wei, Jérôme Barré, Soyoung Ha, Cheng-Hsuan Lu, Maryam Abdi-Oskouei, Benjamin Ménétrier, Cheng Dang https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17058099
Model code and software
JEDI-ACE Shih-Wei Wei, Benjamin Ménétrier, Maryam Abdi-Oskouei https://github.com/weiwilliam/JEDI-ACE
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 673 | 165 | 28 | 866 | 22 | 22 |
- HTML: 673
- PDF: 165
- XML: 28
- Total: 866
- BibTeX: 22
- EndNote: 22
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1