Global S&T Development Trend Analysis Platform of Resources and Environment
DOI | 10.5194/acp-19-10961-2019 |
Comparison of two automated aerosol typing methods and their application to an EARLINET station | |
Voudouri, Kalliopi Artemis1; Siomos, Nikolaos1; Michailidis, Konstantinos1; Papagiannopoulos, Nikolaos2,3; Mona, Lucia2; Cornacchia, Carmelo2; Nicolae, Doina4; Balis, Dimitris1 | |
2019-08-29 | |
发表期刊 | ATMOSPHERIC CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS |
ISSN | 1680-7316 |
EISSN | 1680-7324 |
出版年 | 2019 |
卷号 | 19期号:16页码:10961-10980 |
文章类型 | Article |
语种 | 英语 |
国家 | Greece; Italy; Spain; Romania |
英文摘要 | In this study we apply and compare two algorithms for the automated aerosol-type characterization of the aerosol layers derived from Raman lidar measurements over the EARLINET station of Thessaloniki, Greece. Both automated aerosol-type characterization methods base their typing on lidar-derived aerosol-intensive properties. The methodologies are briefly described and their application to three distinct cases is demonstrated and evaluated. Then the two classification schemes were applied in the automatic mode to a more extensive dataset. The dataset analyzed corresponds to ACTRIS/EARLINET (European Aerosol Research Lidar NETwork) Thessaloniki data acquired during the period 2012-2015. Seventy-one layers out of 110 (percentage of 65 %) were typed by both techniques, and 56 of these 71 layers (percentage of 79 %) were attributed to the same aerosol type. However, as shown, the identification rate of both typing algorithms can be changed regarding the selection of appropriate threshold criteria. Four major types of aerosols are considered in this study: Dust, Maritime, PollutedSmoke and CleanContinental. The analysis showed that the two algorithms, when applied to real atmospheric conditions, provide typing results that are in good agreement regarding the automatic characterization of PollutedSmoke, while there are some differences between the two methods regarding the characterization of Dust and CleanContinental. These disagreements are mainly attributed to differences in the definitions of the aerosol types between the two methods, regarding the intensive properties used and their range. |
领域 | 地球科学 |
收录类别 | SCI-E |
WOS记录号 | WOS:000483093000004 |
WOS关键词 | RAMAN LIDAR OBSERVATIONS ; EYJAFJALLAJOKULL VOLCANIC CLOUD ; SAHARAN DUST ; OPTICAL-PROPERTIES ; MULTIWAVELENGTH LIDAR ; MICROPHYSICAL PROPERTIES ; CLASSIFICATION ; THESSALONIKI ; CALIPSO ; LAYERS |
WOS类目 | Environmental Sciences ; Meteorology & Atmospheric Sciences |
WOS研究方向 | Environmental Sciences & Ecology ; Meteorology & Atmospheric Sciences |
引用统计 | |
文献类型 | 期刊论文 |
条目标识符 | http://119.78.100.173/C666/handle/2XK7JSWQ/186293 |
专题 | 地球科学 |
作者单位 | 1.Aristotle Univ Thessaloniki, Phys Dept, Lab Atmospher Phys, Thessaloniki, Greece; 2.CNR, IMAA, Tito, PZ, Italy; 3.Univ Politecn Cataluna, CommSensLab, Dept Signal Theory & Commun, Barcelona, Spain; 4.Natl Inst R&D Optoelect INOE2000, Magurele, Romania |
推荐引用方式 GB/T 7714 | Voudouri, Kalliopi Artemis,Siomos, Nikolaos,Michailidis, Konstantinos,et al. Comparison of two automated aerosol typing methods and their application to an EARLINET station[J]. ATMOSPHERIC CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS,2019,19(16):10961-10980. |
APA | Voudouri, Kalliopi Artemis.,Siomos, Nikolaos.,Michailidis, Konstantinos.,Papagiannopoulos, Nikolaos.,Mona, Lucia.,...&Balis, Dimitris.(2019).Comparison of two automated aerosol typing methods and their application to an EARLINET station.ATMOSPHERIC CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS,19(16),10961-10980. |
MLA | Voudouri, Kalliopi Artemis,et al."Comparison of two automated aerosol typing methods and their application to an EARLINET station".ATMOSPHERIC CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS 19.16(2019):10961-10980. |
条目包含的文件 | 条目无相关文件。 |
除非特别说明,本系统中所有内容都受版权保护,并保留所有权利。
修改评论