Moxim, W. J., and J. D. Mahlman, 1980: Evaluation of various total ozone sampling networks using the GFDL 3-D tracer model. Journal of Geophysical Research, 85 (C8), 4527-4539.
Abstract: Data sets generated by the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL)
3-D general circulation--tracer model for an ozone experiment are used to
compare the accuracy of various total ozone networks in calculating global
and hemispheric means of total ozone and annual trends of monthly mean total
ozone. The advantage of this approach is that exact model integrals and
trends are known, thus providing an ability to examine the errors expected
in present and hypothesized sampling networks. The effects of both spatial
and temporal sampling errors are presented.
Because the 3-D tracer model uses the same time-dependent wind fields from
year to year, the influence of interannual meteorological variability and
the sampling error resulting from long-term ozone trends cannot be evaluated.
By using varying numbers of observations per month, total ozone networks
of 9, 53, and 181 stations are compared. In addition, a case of 53, plus
15 new, judiciously placed stations is examined. Model network evaluations
of global mean ozone show underestimnates of 1-3% occurring because of a
compensation of Northern and Southern Hemispheric errors as large as -6
and +3%, respectively. The error of global mean ozone from random sampling
networks for various months is examined, showing rapid improvement from
9 to 1% for an increase in the number of random stations from 5 to 100.
Markedly slower improvement is seen with further increases in the number
of stations. One-year trend analyses of total ozone are compared for various
networks and individual stations. Sampling errors of nearly 1%/yr. are seen
for the 53 station case, when using four perfect, equally spaced observations
per month. The errors grow substantially larger with fewer observations.
The effect on global and hemispheric means from stations that did not take
measurements during cloudy periods is also investigated. Results indicate
that the weak annual mean cloud bias error (0.285%) is overwhelmed by the
larger error produced by the decrease in effective network density.