Knowledge of measurement errors is one of the most important issues for assessing the quality of experimental data. In this paper, we compared various methods and instruments for measuring the total ozone content (TOC) near St. Petersburg in the period from 2009 to 2015. We considered the TOC datasets of ground-based measurements at Voyeykovo (Dobson spectrophotometer and M-124 ozonometer) and Peterhof (Bruker 125HR spectrometer), as well as OMI and IASI satellite measurements. To assess the errors intrinsic to each of these instruments three ensembles of the TOC measurements were formed containing different numbers of comparisons and based on different selection criteria. At the first stage, we determined the means and standard deviations between the ensembles of the TOC measurements. Then, assuming a horizontally homogeneous and stationary ozone field, the random and systematic errors of individual methods were evaluated. The average random errors of the TOC measurements for all tree ensembles were 2.9 ± 0.5%, 2.8 ± 0.7%, 1.2 ± 0.2%, and 1.4 ± 0.1% for IASI, M-124, OMI, and Bruker 125HR, respectively. The systematic error of the standard Dobson measurements is–1.7% and–2.1% for OMI and IASI, respectively, and amounts to + 0.5% and + 2.1% for M-124 and Bruker 125HR, respectively. The OMI and Bruker 125HR TOC measurement errors are most resistant to atmospheric conditions, whereas errors in IASI and M-124 TOC measurements depend to a large extent on the state of the atmosphere.
Atmospheric and Oceanic Optics – Springer Journals
Published: Aug 24, 2017
It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.
Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.
All for just $49/month
Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly
Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.
Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.
Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.
All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.
“Hi guys, I cannot tell you how much I love this resource. Incredible. I really believe you've hit the nail on the head with this site in regards to solving the research-purchase issue.”Daniel C.
“Whoa! It’s like Spotify but for academic articles.”@Phil_Robichaud
“I must say, @deepdyve is a fabulous solution to the independent researcher's problem of #access to #information.”@deepthiw
“My last article couldn't be possible without the platform @deepdyve that makes journal papers cheaper.”@JoseServera