JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for DEVORAC Archives


DEVORAC Archives

DEVORAC Archives


DEVORAC@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

DEVORAC Home

DEVORAC Home

DEVORAC  May 2012

DEVORAC May 2012

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

AW: NetCDF output files - thoughts?

From:

Jerg Matthias <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Jerg Matthias <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Tue, 22 May 2012 14:29:30 +0000

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (50 lines)

Hello Chris and Caroline,

I think having the albedo in the file is a good idea. I limitted initially the cost to 100 in the output because I thought that anything larger than 10 is regarded as failed anyway? Sorry if this is wrong.

Cheers,

Matthias


-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: ORAC Developers [mailto:[log in to unmask]] Im Auftrag von Caroline Poulsen
Gesendet: Dienstag, 22. Mai 2012 16:10
An: [log in to unmask]
Betreff: Re: NetCDF output files - thoughts?

Hi Chris, yes clearly cost not being written out correctly is a bug I will look at that and I agree it is useful to add the albedo.
I will fix up the cost if you can add the albedo that would be great. Give me a call if you want advice on how to do that.

Cheers
Caroline

-----Original Message-----
From: ORAC Developers [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Chris Arnold
Sent: 22 May 2012 10:37
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: NetCDF output files - thoughts?

Dear all,

I have two quick thoughts about the NetCDF output files for ORAC.

First - an issue (I think)

At present only costs in the range 0-100 are written to the output file (and everything either side of that range is assigned the fill value). 

> This causes significant difficulties in phase discrimination/cloud masking (particularly over difficult scenes such as sea-ice).

> I think the cost should be written out for ALL retrievals that converge?

I guess a solution would be to output log(cost) on the basis that we are likely to be much more interested in the low costs than the high costs?

Thoughts?

Second - and related

Would it be worth adding the surface albedo information to the secondary output files? It is a key part of the error budget and thus an important consideration when looking at the diagnostics?

Best wishes,

Chris

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JISCMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011


WWW.JISCMAIL.AC.UK

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager