Hi Patrick， Thank you for your helpful reply. I will try again according to your suggestion.
Best wishes. Sincerely, ZhangChao > -----原始邮件----- > 发件人: "Patrick Eriksson" <[email protected]> > 发送时间: 2023-10-05 03:55:05 (星期四) > 收件人: "张超" <[email protected]>, [email protected] > 抄送: > 主题: Re: [arts-users] consultancy question > > Hi, > > > Thanks for the quick reply! Regarding the first point mentioned, the simulation is described in detail as follows. The first simulation example based on is the artscomponents/montecarlo.arts file, with the input of 3-dimensional ERA5 contour data including temperature, humidity, pressure, and altitude, and the absorption model including water vapor, nitrogen, and oxygen, with the water vapor and oxygen being MPM93 models. Then according to the product matching with the Microwave Thermometer of Fengyun3 Satellite (MWTS) to the height and line of sight of the sensor in flight, input to sensr_pos and sensor_los, the sensor setup adopts sensor_responseGenericAMSU. other agendas include the surface agendas as well as the non-refractive situation of the air. The surface is modeled using TELSEM for land and TESSEM for ocean depending on the situation. However, the simulation results are highly biased, in the teens of K or more. Can you please see where the problem is? Or is there any related work that you can recommend as a reference? > > My recommendation is to start with setting up a clear-sky simulation. > And focus on the channels not having a sensitivity to the surface. If > you still have problems, you have most likely an error in the input data > (check e.g. units) or a mistake when defining the absorption of gases > > > > One more question, I would like to ask if the OEM method of ARTS2.4 is perfect, I didn't use QPACK of matlab because I am more familiar with ARTS language. > > The OEM inside ARTS can do everything you can do in Qpack. > > Bye, > > Patrick </[email protected]></[email protected]>
