Abstract

Abstract. This study applies fuzzy k-means (FKM) cluster analyses to a subset of the parameters reported in the CALIPSO lidar level 2 data products in order to classify the layers detected as either clouds or aerosols. The results obtained are used to assess the reliability of the cloud–aerosol discrimination (CAD) scores reported in the version 4.1 release of the CALIPSO data products. FKM is an unsupervised learning algorithm, whereas the CALIPSO operational CAD algorithm (COCA) takes a highly supervised approach. Despite these substantial computational and architectural differences, our statistical analyses show that the FKM classifications agree with the COCA classifications for more than 94 % of the cases in the troposphere. This high degree of similarity is achieved because the lidar-measured signatures of the majority of the clouds and the aerosols are naturally distinct, and hence objective methods can independently and effectively separate the two classes in most cases. Classification differences most often occur in complex scenes (e.g., evaporating water cloud filaments embedded in dense aerosol) or when observing diffuse features that occur only intermittently (e.g., volcanic ash in the tropical tropopause layer). The two methods examined in this study establish overall classification correctness boundaries due to their differing algorithm uncertainties. In addition to comparing the outputs from the two algorithms, analysis of sampling, data training, performance measurements, fuzzy linear discriminants, defuzzification, error propagation, and key parameters in feature type discrimination with the FKM method are further discussed in order to better understand the utility and limits of the application of clustering algorithms to space lidar measurements. In general, we find that both FKM and COCA classification uncertainties are only minimally affected by noise in the CALIPSO measurements, though both algorithms can be challenged by especially complex scenes containing mixtures of discrete layer types. Our analysis results show that attenuated backscatter and color ratio are the driving factors that separate water clouds from aerosols; backscatter intensity, depolarization, and mid-layer altitude are most useful in discriminating between aerosols and ice clouds; and the joint distribution of backscatter intensity and depolarization ratio is critically important for distinguishing ice clouds from water clouds.

Highlights

  • The Cloud-Aerosol Lidar and Infrared Pathfinder Satellite Observation (CALIPSO) mission has been developed through a close and ongoing collaboration between NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC) and the French space agency, Centre National D’Études Spatiales (CNES) (Winker et al, 2010)

  • We use the fuzzy k-means (FKM) clustering algorithm to evaluate the classifications reported by the cloud– aerosol discrimination (CAD) algorithm used in the standard processing of the Cloud-Aerosol Lidar with Orthogonal Polarization (CALIOP) measurements

  • Being able to accurately separate clouds from aerosols is an essential task in the analysis of the elastic backscatter lidar measurements being continuously acquired by Cloud-Aerosol Lidar and Infrared Pathfinder Satellite Observation (CALIPSO) mission

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The Cloud-Aerosol Lidar and Infrared Pathfinder Satellite Observation (CALIPSO) mission has been developed through a close and ongoing collaboration between NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC) and the French space agency, Centre National D’Études Spatiales (CNES) (Winker et al, 2010). CALIOP level 2 products have been thoroughly validated: cirrus cloud heights and extinction coefficients have been validated using measurements by Raman lidars (Thorsen et al, 2011), Cloud Physics Lidar (CPL) measurements (Yorks et., 2011; Hlavka et al, 2012), and in situ observations (Mioche et al, 2010); CALIOP aerosol typing has been assessed by HSRL measurements (Burton et al, 2013) and Aerosol Robotic Network (AERONET) retrievals (Mielonen et al, 2009); and CALIOP aerosol optical depth estimates have been validated using HSRL measurements (Rogers et al, 2014), Raman measurements (Tesche et al, 2013), AERONET measurements (Schuster et al, 2012; Omar et al, 2013), and Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) retrievals (Redemann et al, 2012) These level 2 validation studies implicitly depend on the assumption that the COCA classifications are essentially correct; this fundamental assumption has yet to be verified.

CALIOP CAD PDF construction
Fuzzy k-means cluster analysis
FKM algorithm architecture
Data sample and training
Data filtering
Distance calculation
The choice of class k and fuzzy exponent φ
CAD from the fuzzy k-means algorithm
Uncertainties: class overlap
Statistical comparisons of clouds and aerosols
Special case studies
High-altitude smoke
Discussion
Key parameter analysis
Fuzzy linear discriminant analysis
Principal component analysis
Findings
Error propagation
Conclusions
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call