Dear Jonathan:
In the case of the GOES-R derived motion winds product, the error estimate
(i.e. more formally referred to as Expected Error) is based on a custom
algorithm.
This expected error algorithm is specific to atmospheric wind vectors
derived from satellte data. The overarching concept of the wind algorithms
generated from satellite data is doing pattern matching of phenomena (like
clouds) across multiple images of the same region separated by some period
of time
The GOES-R incarnation of this Expected Error approach makes use of a set
of error predictors including (1) NWP model data (wind shear, temperature
gradient), (2) wind speed, direction, and consistency quality indicators
output from the winds algorithm proper, and (3) a wavelength dependent
constants (GOES-R generates sets of wind vectors from a visible and several
emissive bands)
I also found an article on the web that discusses it:
https://www.eumetsat.int/cs/idcplg?IdcService=GET_FILE&dDocName=pdf_conf_p42
_s2_le_marshall&allowInterrupt=1&noSaveAs=1&RevisionSelectionMethod=LatestRe
leased
very respectfully,
randy
Dear all
OK, I agree that if it's useful to compare them, then they should be
described
in a standardised way.
Why is this *not* a standard error? I suppose that to be described as a
standard error it should be a number you could regard as the standard
deviation
of the true value around the stated value. If it's not that, are there
other
ways you would use such a number?
Best wishes
Jonathan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <
http://mailman.cgd.ucar.edu/pipermail/cf-metadata/attachments/20130705/f3fc8baf/attachment.html>
Received on Fri Jul 05 2013 - 07:28:46 BST
