% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Bais:28660,
author = {Bais, A. F. and Madronich, S. and Crawford, J. and Hall, S.
R. and Mayer, B. and van Weele, M. and Lenoble, J. and
Calvert, J. G. and Cantrell, A. A. and Shetter, R. E. and
Hofzumahaus, A. and Köpke, P. and Monks, P. S. and Frost,
G. and McKenzie, R. and Krotkov, N. and Kylling, A. and
Swartz, W. H. and Lloyd, S. and Pfister, G. and Martin, T.
J. and Röth, E. P. and Griffioen, E. and Ruggaber, A. and
Krol, M. and Kraus, A. and Edwards, G. D. and Müller, M.
and Lefer, B. and Johnston, P. and Schwander, H. and
Flittner, D. and Gardiner, B. G. and Barrick, L. A. and
Schmitt, R.},
title = {{I}nternational photolysis frequency measurement and model
intercomparison ({IPMMI}): spectral actinic solar flux
measurements and modeling},
journal = {Journal of Geophysical Research},
volume = {108},
issn = {0148-0227},
address = {Washington, DC},
publisher = {Union},
reportid = {PreJuSER-28660},
pages = {16},
year = {2003},
note = {Record converted from VDB: 12.11.2012},
abstract = {[1] The International Photolysis Frequency Measurement and
Model Intercomparison (IPMMI) took place in Boulder,
Colorado, from 15 to 19 June 1998, aiming to investigate the
level of accuracy of photolysis frequency and spectral
downwelling actinic flux measurements and to explore the
ability of radiative transfer models to reproduce the
measurements. During this period, 2 days were selected to
compare model calculations with measurements, one cloud-free
and one cloudy. A series of ancillary measurements were also
performed and provided parameters required as input to the
models. Both measurements and modeling were blind, in the
sense that no exchanges of data or calculations were allowed
among the participants, and the results were objectively
analyzed and compared by two independent referees. The
objective of this paper is, first, to present the results of
comparisons made between measured and modeled downwelling
actinic flux and irradiance spectra and, second, to
investigate the reasons for which some of the models or
measurements deviate from the others. For clear skies the
relative agreement between the 16 models depends strongly on
solar zenith angle (SZA) and wavelength as well as on the
input parameters used, like the extraterrestrial (ET) solar
flux and the absorption cross sections. The majority of the
models (11) agreed to within about $+/-6\%$ for solar zenith
angles smaller than similar to60degrees. The agreement among
the measured spectra depends on the optical characteristics
of the instruments (e.g., slit function, stray light
rejection, and sensitivity). After transforming the
measurements to a common spectral resolution, two of the
three participating spectroradiometers agree to within
similar $to10\%$ for wavelengths longer than 310 nm and at
all solar zenith angles, while their differences increase
when moving to shorter wavelengths. Most models agree well
with the measurements (both downwelling actinic flux and
global irradiance), especially at local noon, where the
agreement is within a few percent. A few models exhibit
significant deviations with respect either to wavelength or
to solar zenith angle. Models that use the Atmospheric
Laboratory for Applications and Science 3 (ATLAS-3) solar
flux agree better with the measured spectra, suggesting that
ATLAS-3 is probably more appropriate for radiative transfer
modeling in the ultraviolet.},
keywords = {J (WoSType)},
cin = {ICG-I / ICG-II},
ddc = {550},
cid = {I:(DE-Juel1)VDB47 / I:(DE-Juel1)VDB48},
pnm = {Chemie und Dynamik der Geo-Biosphäre},
pid = {G:(DE-Juel1)FUEK257},
shelfmark = {Meteorology $\&$ Atmospheric Sciences},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
UT = {WOS:000184604300001},
doi = {10.1029/2002JD002891},
url = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/28660},
}