A comparison between the IOCCG Simulated Data Set and NOMAD V2 from an OWT perspective Timothy S. Moore University of New Hampshire GIOP meeting Sept. 25, 2010 Anchorage Alaska
OWTNOMAD* w/ IOPs IOCCG Sim. Global Avg. 13 (9) (14) (17) (26) (14) (13) (7) (1)1<1 Distribution of OWTs in Data sets vs. Ocean Obsverations (numbers are in percent) * - AOP without matching IOPSs
N=41 N=45 N=180 N=91 N=6 N=19 N=45 N=43 OWT 1 OWT 2 OWT 3 OWT 4 OWT 5 OWT 6 OWT 7 OWT 8
ag411 OWT 1 OWT 4 OWT 3 OWT 2 OWT 5 OWT 6 OWT 7 OWT 8
bbp slope
aph
aph 443
Comparison to NOMAD data
IOCCG OWT 1 NOMAD ag s
IOCCG NOMAD log ag443 OWT 1 log aph443ag443/at443bbp slope
log ag443 bbp slope log aph443 OWT 2 IOCCG NOMAD ag443/at443
OWT 3 log ag443 bbp slope log aph443 IOCCG ag443/at443
OWT 4 log ag443 bbp slope log aph443 IOCCG ag443/at443
OWT 5 log ag443 bbp slope log aph443 IOCCG ag443/at443
OWT 6 log ag443 bbp slope log aph443 IOCCG ag443/at443
OWT 7 log ag443 bbp slope log aph443 IOCCG ag443/at443
OWT 8 log ag443 bbp slope log aph443 IOCCG ag443/at443
All
Summary There are some inconsistencies in the OWT-based distributions of IOPs between NOMAD and the IOCCG simulated data set. Both data sets are skewed towards coastal/case 2 waters. Both data sets have some questions regarding the spectral slope of CDOM. If a new simulated data set is being considered, the generation of IOPs and IOP pairs could be further constrained by the variance and co-variance as seen in NOMAD within different OWTs. In addition, the representation of data points could be guided by the global distribution of naturally occurring OWTs.