Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 227

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Evaluation of the Ozone Fields in NASA’s MERRA-2 Reanalysis

Open access
Wargan, Krzysztof, Labow, Gordon, Frith, Stacey, Pawson, Steven, Livesey, Nathaniel, Partyka, Gary·2017·Journal of Climate

Abstract

The assimilated ozone product from the Modern-Era Retrospective Analysis for Research and Applications, version 2 (MERRA-2), produced at NASA’s Global Modeling and Assimilation Office (GMAO) spanning the time period from 1980 to the present is described herein, and its quality is assessed. MERRA-2 assimilates partial column ozone retrievals from a series of Solar Backscatter Ultraviolet Radiometer (SBUV) instruments on NASA and NOAA spacecraft between January 1980 and September 2004: starting in October 2004, retrieved ozone profiles from the Microwave Limb Sounder (MLS) and total column ozone from the Ozone Monitoring Instrument on NASA’s EOS Aura satellite are assimilated. The MERRA-2 ozone is compared with independent satellite and ozonesonde data, focusing on the representation of the spatial and temporal variability of stratospheric and upper-tropospheric ozone and on implications of the change in the observing system from SBUV to EOS Aura. The comparisons show agreement within 10% (standard deviation of the difference) between MERRA-2 profiles and independent satellite data in most of the stratosphere. The agreement improves after 2004, when EOS Aura data are assimilated. The standard deviation of the differences between the lower-stratospheric and upper-tropospheric MERRA-2 ozone and ozonesondes is 11.2% and 24.5%, respectively, with correlations of 0.8 and above, indicative of a realistic representation of the near-tropopause ozone variability in MERRA-2. The agreement improves significantly in the EOS Aura period; however, MERRA-2 is biased low in the upper troposphere with respect to the ozonesondes. Caution is recommended when using MERRA-2 ozone for decadal changes and trend studies.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1175/jcli-d-16-0699.1

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

  • “…resolution long-term records of meteorological fields and composition of Earth’s atmosphere by utilizing the data assimilation methodology (Cohn 1997; Kalnay 2003), whereby satellite and ground-based observations are combined with general circulation model (GCM) simulations in a statistically…”
    Method

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 227

Metadata

Authors
Wargan, K., Labow, G., Frith, S., Pawson, S., Livesey, N., & Partyka, G.
Venue
Journal of Climate
Published
2017-04
Volume
30
Issue
8
Pages
2961-2988
ISSN
  • 0894-8755 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-0442
OpenAlex
W2588787202
Cited by
227
References
1
FWCI
8.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Evaluation of the Ozone Fields in NASA’s MERRA-2 Reanalysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1175/jcli-d-16-0699.1
The paper
Wargan, K., Labow, G., Frith, S., Pawson, S., Livesey, N., & Partyka, G. (2017). Evaluation of the Ozone Fields in NASA’s MERRA-2 Reanalysis. Journal of Climate. https://doi.org/10.1175/jcli-d-16-0699.1

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.