Intercomparison of CO measurements from TROPOMI, ACE-FTS, and a high-Arctic ground-based Fourier transform spectrometer

The TROPOspheric Monitoring Instrument (TROPOMI) provides a daily, spatially resolved (initially 7×7 km2, upgraded to 7×5.6 km2 in August 2019) global dataset of CO columns; however, due to the relative sparseness of reliable ground-based data sources, it can be challenging to characterize the validity and accuracy of satellite data products in remote regions such as the high Arctic. In these regions, satellite intercomparisons can supplement model- and ground-based validation efforts and serve to verify previously observed differences. In this paper, we compare the CO products from TROPOMI, the Atmospheric Chemistry Experiment (ACE) Fourier transform spectrometer (FTS), and a high-Arctic ground-based FTS located at the Polar Environment Atmospheric Research Laboratory (PEARL) in Eureka, Nunavut (80.05∘ N, 86.42∘ W). A global comparison of TROPOMI reference profiles scaled by the retrieved total column with ACE-FTS CO partial columns for the period from 28 November 2017 to 31 May 2020 displays excellent agreement between the two datasets (R=0.93) and a small relative bias of -0.83±0.26% (bias ± standard error of the mean). Additional comparisons were performed within five latitude bands: the north polar region (60 to 90∘ N), northern mid-latitudes (20 to 60∘ N), the equatorial region (20∘ S to 20∘ N), southern mid-latitudes (60 to 20∘ S), and the south polar region (90 to 60∘ S). Latitudinal comparisons of the TROPOMI and ACE-FTS CO datasets show strong correlations ranging from R=0.93 (southern mid-latitudes) to R=0.86 (equatorial region) between the CO products but display a dependence of the mean differences on latitude. Positive mean biases of 7.93±0.61 % and 7.21±0.52 % were found in the northern and southern polar regions, respectively, while a negative bias of -9.41±0.55% was observed in the equatorial region. To investigate whether these differences are introduced by cloud contamination, which is reflected in the TROPOMI averaging kernel shape, the latitudinal comparisons were repeated for cloud-covered pixels and clear-sky pixels only, as well as for the unsmoothed and smoothed cases. Clear-sky pixels were found to be biased higher with poorer correlations on average than clear+cloudy scenes and cloud-covered scenes only. Furthermore, the latitudinal dependence on the biases was observed in both the smoothed and unsmoothed cases. To provide additional context to the global comparisons of TROPOMI with ACE-FTS in the Arctic, both satellite datasets were compared against measurements from the ground-based PEARL-FTS. Comparisons of TROPOMI with smoothed PEARL-FTS total columns in the period of 3 March 2018 to 27 March 2020 display a strong correlation (R=0.88); however, a positive mean bias of 14.7±0.16 % was also found. A partial column comparison of ACE-FTS with the PEARL-FTS in the period from 25 February 2007 to 18 March 2020 shows good agreement (R=0.79) and a mean positive bias of 7.89±0.21 % in the ACE-FTS product relative to the ground-based FTS. The magnitude and sign of the mean relative differences are consistent across all intercomparisons in this work, as well as with recent ground-based validation efforts, suggesting that the current TROPOMI CO product exhibits a positive bias in the high-Arctic region. However, the observed bias is within the TROPOMI mission accuracy requirement of ±15 %, providing further confirmation that the data quality in these remote high-latitude regions meets this specification.

Performance of 2020 Real-Time Atlantic Hurricane Forecasts from High-Resolution Global-Nested Hurricane Models: HAFS-globalnest and GFDL T-SHiELD

The global-nested Hurricane Analysis and Forecast System (HAFS-globalnest) is one piece of NOAA’s Unified Forecast System (UFS) application for hurricanes. In this study, results are analyzed from 2020 real-time forecasts by HAFS-globalnest and a similar global-nested model, the Tropical Atlantic version of GFDL’s System for High-resolution prediction on Earth- to- Local Domains (T-SHiELD). HAFS-globalnest produced the highest track forecast skill compared to several operational and experimental models, while T-SHiELD showed promising track skill as well. The intensity forecasts from HAFS-globalnest generally had a positive bias at longer lead times primarily due to the lack of ocean coupling, while T-SHiELD had a much smaller intensity bias particularly at longer forecast lead times. With the introduction of a modified planetary boundary layer scheme and an increased number of vertical levels, particularly in the boundary layer, HAFS forecasts of storm size had a smaller positive bias than occurred in the 2019 version of HAFS-globalnest. Despite track forecasts that were comparable to the operational GFS and HWRF, both HAFS-globalnest and T-SHiELD suffered from a persistent right-of-track bias in several cases at the 4-5 day forecast lead times. The reasons for this bias were related to the strength of the subtropical ridge over the western North Atlantic and are continuing to be investigated and diagnosed. A few key case studies from this very active hurricane season, including Hurricanes Laura and Delta, were examined.

Seasonal Sea Ice Prediction with the CICE Model and Positive Impact of CryoSat-2 Ice Thickness Initialization

The Los Alamos sea ice model (CICE) is being tested in standalone mode for its suitability for seasonal time scale prediction. The prescribed atmospheric forcings to drive the model are from the NCEP Climate Forecast System Reanalysis (CFSR). A built-in mixed layer ocean model in CICE is used. Initial conditions for the sea ice and the mixed layer ocean in the control experiments are also from CFSR. The simulated sea ice extent in the Arctic in control experiments is generally in good agreement with observations in the warm season at all lead times up to 12 months, suggesting that CICE is able to provide useful ice edge information for seasonal prediction. However, the ice thickness forecast has a positive bias stemming from the initial conditions and often persists for more than a season, limiting the model’s seasonal forecast skill. In addition, thicker ice has a lower melting rate in the warm season, both at the bottom and top, contributing to this positive bias. When this bias is removed by initializing the model using ice thickness data from satellite observations while keeping all other initial fields unchanged, both simulated ice edge and thickness improve. This indicates the important role of ice thickness initialization in sea ice seasonal prediction.

Power and Conflict

Most network research reflects a positive bias, suggesting that organizations can accomplish more by working together than they can by working alone. However, networks can also catalyze conflict between partners. This chapter identifies the various forms of power and describes how power imbalances can increase the potential for conflict in networks. It introduces a typology of conflict occurring at three interfaces. Micro-level conflicts take place at the interface between individuals and organizations. Meso-level conflicts occur between the organization and the network. And, macro-level conflicts are those in which the network conflicts with the broader community or system in which it resides. The chapter uses examples of network conflict from case studies, noting the consequences of the conflict. The chapter identifies different ways that networks can successfully manage conflict. Finally, the chapter includes two tools for addressing power and conflict: the stakeholder participation tool and the VOICE heuristic.

Neurocomputational mechanism of controllability inference under a multi-agent setting

Controllability perception significantly influences motivated behavior and emotion and requires an estimation of one’s influence on an environment. Previous studies have shown that an agent can infer controllability by observing contingency between one’s own action and outcome if there are no other outcome-relevant agents in an environment. However, if there are multiple agents who can influence the outcome, estimation of one’s genuine controllability requires exclusion of other agents’ possible influence. Here, we first investigated a computational and neural mechanism of controllability inference in a multi-agent setting. Our novel multi-agent Bayesian controllability inference model showed that other people’s action-outcome contingency information is integrated with one’s own action-outcome contingency to infer controllability, which can be explained as a Bayesian inference. Model-based functional MRI analyses showed that multi-agent Bayesian controllability inference recruits the temporoparietal junction (TPJ) and striatum. Then, this inferred controllability information was leveraged to increase motivated behavior in the vmPFC. These results generalize the previously known role of the striatum and vmPFC in single-agent controllability to multi-agent controllability, and this generalized role requires the TPJ in addition to the striatum of single-agent controllability to integrate both self- and other-related information. Finally, we identified an innate positive bias toward the self during the multi-agent controllability inference, which facilitated behavioral adaptation under volatile controllability. Furthermore, low positive bias and high negative bias were associated with increased daily feelings of guilt. Our results provide a mechanism of how our sense of controllability fluctuates due to other people in our lives, which might be related to social learned helplessness and depression.