1. A discussion of Radiative Transfer Models Thomas J. Kleespies NOAA/NESDIS

2. Disclaimer There will be some overlap between this presentation and this afternoon’s presentation There will be some overlap between these two presentations and other speakers This is good! This presentation will be a broad brush overview of radiative transfer models relevant to data assimilation (i.e. fast and with adjoint)

3. Outline Scattering vs absorption models Line vs fast models Generally available line models Generally available fast models Generally available scattering models Generally available general purpose models

4. Scattering vs Absorption models Full radiative transfer equation –Surface emission –Atmospheric emission –Surface reflection Downward atmospheric Downward solar Downward CBR –Single scattering –Multiple scattering –Solar and Thermal

5. Single vs Multiple Scattering

6. Atmospheric Emission Surface Emission Solar Single Scattering Surface Solar Reflection Surface diffuse reflection Atmospheric Multiple Scattering

7. General Types of Absorption Models Line – by – Line models –Numerically integrate individual absorption lines to produce optical depth/transmittance profile as a function of wavelength Band Models –fit to LBL at narrow spectral interval Fast Models –Statistical fit to line-by-line model transmittance for diverse atmospheres for specific instrument bandpass

8. General Types of Scattering Models Discrete Ordinate Models –Radiative intensity not a function of azimuth –N streams … bigger N, better result, more expensive Adding/Doubling Models –Form of ray tracing with known transmission/ reflection of each layer. –Reflection and transmission of combined layers obtained by computing successive reflections between two layers. –If layers have same optical depth, referred to as doubling Monte Carlo

9. Additional Generally need a Mie code (spherical scatterers) or something like it to specify the scattering parameters Need to pick a polydispersion of scatterers

10. Multiple scattering Models generally too expensive for data assimilation When scattering is included in data assimilation RTM, it is generally single scattering, or a few streams approximation. This is the topic of very active research

11. Generally Available Scattering Models DISORT –Discrete ordinate, N-stream plane parallel code Fu-Liou –2 and 4 stream radiative transfer solver SHDOM –1,2,3D RTM, including adjoint

12. Steps in absorption/emission modeling Spectroscopic Data Base –Absorber, line position, line strength, line half-width, etc. Line model –Integrates individual lines over instrument spectral response. –Very expensive in infrared, almost trivial in microwave Fast model –polynomial fit to LBL transmittances

13. Public molecular absorption databases HITRAN – Rothman et al. –HITRAN is a compilation of spectroscopic parameters that a variety of computer codes use to predict and simulate the transmission and emission of light in the atmosphere. The original version was created at the Air Force Cambridge Research Laboratories (1960's). The database is maintained and developed at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics in Cambridge MA, USA. GEISA - Jacquinet-Husson et al. –GEISA is a computer-accessible spectroscopic database, designed to facilitate accurate forward radiative transfer calculations using a line-by-line and layer-by-layer approach. Maintained and developed at Laboratoire de Météorologie Dynamique (LMD) in France.

14. Absorption Lines near 15  m

15. Absorption Lines Near 4.3  m

17. Microwave line absorption

18. Generally Available Line Models LBLRTM – AER (Clough et al.) –Based on FASCODE from AFGL –Supported by ARM –Widely used in US –Uses HITRAN GENLEN2 – Edwards – NCAR –Used in Europe –Europeans use GEISA or HITRAN

19. Generally available band models MODTRAN –developed by AFGL –enhanced by private industry –based upon FASCODE/LBLRTM/HITRAN –extremely flexible in atmosphere, absorbers, geometry –extremely cumbersome data input –no adjoint available, too slow for DA –DoD support waning

20. Generally Available Fast Models Community Radiative Transfer Model-CRTM (OPTRAN) –used at NCEP/EMC, NASA,… Radiative Transfer TOVS (RTTOV) –used at EUMETSAT, METOFFICE, others AESFAST –used at Environment Canada Optimal Spectral Sampling (OSS) –developed at AER, receiving some attention here

21. Why fast models? Line-by-line models can take up to an hour to compute a single channel/atmosphere Fast models take maybe a millisecond Line-by-line models don’t have adjoints, have to do finite differencing Fast models have analytic adjoints. We will see how to write them this afternoon.

22. CRTM Based upon Optical Path TRANsmittance (McMillin et al) Includes thermal emittance, clouds, simplified scattering, CBR, solar influence, surface emissivity models, support for many instruments Yong Han will discuss in detail on 8 Aug

23. OPTRAN Predicts absorption coefficient on the absorber level (product of which is optical depth, negative exponential of that is transmittance) – arbitrary input profile Zenith angle implicitly included in optical path Fitted to LBLRTM/HITRAN and Leibe(89,93) Adjoint well developed

24. RTTOV Predicts optical depth on fixed pressure levels – must interpolate input profile to the fixed levels Must explicitly treat zenith angle Includes thermal emittance, clouds, simplified scattering, CBR, solar influence, surface emissivity models, support for many instruments Fitted to GENLN2/MPM89-92/HITRAN (Kcarta for IASI) Adjoint well developed

25. Which is better? Depends on the situation/instrument For a bit dated but still useful intercomparison of RTMs, see http://collaboration.cmc.ec.gc.ca/science/ar ma/intercomparison/index.html

26. CRTM vs RTTOV A friendly competition is very healthy, and results in improvements in both codes Institutions generally like to use locally developed codes because of control issues.

27. Innovation This is the de-biased difference between the radiance observations and the radiances computed from the NWP model background Following statistics are from global assimilation systems, clear only.

28. NCEP Temperature

29. Metoffice Temperature

30. NCEP Water Vapor

31. Metoffice Water Vapour

32. ITWG Intercomparison Bias against RTM

33. ITWG Intercomparison

34. Summary Overview of radiative transfer modeling Emphasis on fast forward models This afternoon I will discuss how the Jacobians are computed You will have the opportunity to perform simple coding exercises to generate tangent linear/adjoint-jacobian code