Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-3928
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-3928
17 Aug 2026
 | 17 Aug 2026
Status: this preprint is open for discussion and under review for Atmospheric Measurement Techniques (AMT).

Technical note: comparison of manually and automatically evaluated profiles of a PollyXT multiwavelength polarization Raman lidar

Julian Hofer, Holger Baars, Zhenping Yin, Andi Klamt, Martin Radenz, Leonard König, Athena A. Floutsi, Cristofer Jimenez, Moritz Haarig, Dietrich Althausen, Benedikt Gast, Håvard S. Buholdt, Nathan Skupin, Jonas Neumann, Sabur F. Abdullozoda, Abduvosit N. Makhmudov, Johannes Bühl, Ronny Engelmann, Ulla Wandinger, and Albert Ansmann

Abstract. This technical note presents a comprehensive comparison of manually and automatically analyzed lidar profiles of aerosol optical properties retrieved from an 18-month measurement campaign with a continuously measuring, automated PollyXT multiwavelength polarization Raman lidar in Dushanbe, Tajikistan. The manual analysis was performed using a custom software (known as Verlauf) in multiple analyses steps based on visual inspection of the lidar signals. Its results serve as the reference dataset. The automatic analysis was performed using the PollyNET Processing Chain (PPC) (version 4.0). Retrieval parameters, derived layer-mean values, and seasonal mean and median profiles of aerosol optical properties (backscatter and extinction coefficients, particle depolarization and lidar ratios, and backscatter- and extinction-related Angstrom exponents) of the two datasets were compared. The absolute values of the percentage differences of the seasonal mean and median backscatter coefficient profiles at 1.5 km height are largely below 10 %, except at 532 nm in winter and at 1064 nm in spring and winter. The absolute values of the percentage differences of the seasonal mean and median extinction coefficient profiles at 1.5 km height are largely less than 5 %. The absolute values of the percentage differences of the seasonal mean and median particle depolarization ratios at 1.5 km are largely below 20 % at 355 and below 10 % at 532 nm wavelength. For the most part, these discrepancies are within the measurement uncertainties of the considered quantities despite challenges in the automatic retrieval such as reference height detection, depolarization calibration, and cloud screening. This supports the conclusion that the automatically analyzed profiles of aerosol optical properties are utilizable for common applications, such as extinction statistics, aerosol typing, and retrieval of microphysical and cloud-relevant aerosol properties. However, caution should be exercised when using the particle depolarization ratio at 355 nm and backscatter-related Angstrom exponents, which showed enhanced discrepancies. The results will assist further improvements of the PPC and the implementation of additional features (e.g., optimal estimation methods, retrievals of microphysics). Together with the growing network of PollyXT lidars, the automatic processing chain will remain under constant development with the goal of dissemination of near real-time data on product level with high quality to users and scientific databases.

Competing interests: At least one of the (co-)authors is a member of the editorial board of Atmospheric Measurement Techniques.

Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this paper. While Copernicus Publications makes every effort to include appropriate place names, the final responsibility lies with the authors. Views expressed in the text are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher.
Share
Julian Hofer, Holger Baars, Zhenping Yin, Andi Klamt, Martin Radenz, Leonard König, Athena A. Floutsi, Cristofer Jimenez, Moritz Haarig, Dietrich Althausen, Benedikt Gast, Håvard S. Buholdt, Nathan Skupin, Jonas Neumann, Sabur F. Abdullozoda, Abduvosit N. Makhmudov, Johannes Bühl, Ronny Engelmann, Ulla Wandinger, and Albert Ansmann

Status: open (until 21 Sep 2026)

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
Julian Hofer, Holger Baars, Zhenping Yin, Andi Klamt, Martin Radenz, Leonard König, Athena A. Floutsi, Cristofer Jimenez, Moritz Haarig, Dietrich Althausen, Benedikt Gast, Håvard S. Buholdt, Nathan Skupin, Jonas Neumann, Sabur F. Abdullozoda, Abduvosit N. Makhmudov, Johannes Bühl, Ronny Engelmann, Ulla Wandinger, and Albert Ansmann

Data sets

Manually (Verlauf -software) and automatically analyzed (PollyNET Processing Chain) lidar profiles from the CADEX campaign (2015–2016) Hofer et al. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21023988

Model code and software

PollyNET: Pollynet Processing Chain Klamt et al. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13379737

Julian Hofer, Holger Baars, Zhenping Yin, Andi Klamt, Martin Radenz, Leonard König, Athena A. Floutsi, Cristofer Jimenez, Moritz Haarig, Dietrich Althausen, Benedikt Gast, Håvard S. Buholdt, Nathan Skupin, Jonas Neumann, Sabur F. Abdullozoda, Abduvosit N. Makhmudov, Johannes Bühl, Ronny Engelmann, Ulla Wandinger, and Albert Ansmann
Metrics will be available soon.
Latest update: 17 Aug 2026
Download
Short summary
A comparison of manually and automatically analyzed lidar profiles of aerosol optical properties is presented. The manual analysis was performed using a custom software in multiple analyses steps based on visual inspection of the lidar signals. The automatic analysis was performed using an automatic processing chain. The comparison shows good agreement and demonstrates the suitability of the automatic retrievals for various applications of aerosol optical property profiles.
Share