Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 446

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

S5P TROPOMI NO 2 slant column retrieval: method, stability, uncertainties and comparisons with OMI

Open access
van Geffen, Jos, Boersma, K. Folkert, Eskes, Henk, Sneep, Maarten, ter Linden, Mark, Zara, Marina, Veefkind, J. Pepijn·2020·Atmospheric Measurement Techniques

Abstract

Abstract. The Tropospheric Monitoring Instrument (TROPOMI), aboard the Sentinel-5 Precursor (S5P) satellite, launched on 13 October 2017, provides measurements of atmospheric trace gases and of cloud and aerosol properties at an unprecedented spatial resolution of approximately 7×3.5 km2 (approx. 5.5×3.5 km2 as of 6 August 2019), achieving near-global coverage in 1 d. The retrieval of nitrogen dioxide (NO2) concentrations is a three-step procedure: slant column density (SCD) retrieval, separation of the SCD in its stratospheric and tropospheric components, and conversion of these into vertical column densities. This study focusses on the TROPOMI NO2 SCD retrieval: the retrieval method used, the stability of the SCDs and the SCD uncertainties, and a comparison with the Ozone Monitoring Instrument (OMI) NO2 SCDs. The statistical uncertainty, based on the spatial variability of the SCDs over a remote Pacific Ocean sector, is 8.63 µmol m−2 for all pixels (9.45 µmol m−2 for clear-sky pixels), which is very stable over time and some 30 % less than the long-term average over OMI–QA4ECV data (since the pixel size reduction TROPOMI uncertainties are ∼8 % larger). The SCD uncertainty reported by the differential optical absorption spectroscopy (DOAS) fit is about 10 % larger than the statistical uncertainty, while for OMI–QA4ECV the DOAS uncertainty is some 20 % larger than its statistical uncertainty. Comparison of the SCDs themselves over the Pacific Ocean, averaged over 1 month, shows that TROPOMI is about 5 % higher than OMI–QA4ECV, which seems to be due mainly to the use of the so-called intensity offset correction in OMI–QA4ECV but not in TROPOMI: turning that correction off means about 5 % higher SCDs. The row-to-row variation in the SCDs of TROPOMI, the “stripe amplitude”, is 2.15 µmol m−2, while for OMI–QA4ECV it is a factor of ∼2 (∼5) larger in 2005 (2018); still, a so-called stripe correction of this non-physical across-track variation is useful for TROPOMI data. In short, TROPOMI shows a superior performance compared with OMI–QA4ECV and operates as anticipated from instrument specifications. The TROPOMI data used in this study cover 30 April 2018 up to 31 January 2020.

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 · 10.5194/amt-13-1315-2020

Cites

2 of 2 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

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 446

Metadata

Authors
van Geffen, J., Boersma, K. F., Eskes, H., Sneep, M., ter Linden, M., Zara, M., & Veefkind, J. P.
Venue
Atmospheric Measurement Techniques
Published
2020-03-23
Volume
13
Issue
3
Pages
1315-1335
ISSN
  • 1867-1381 (ISSN-L)
  • 1867-8548
OpenAlex
W2995883393
Cited by
446
References
2
FWCI
22.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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: S5P TROPOMI NO 2 slant column retrieval: method, stability, uncertainties and comparisons with OMI. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5194/amt-13-1315-2020
The paper
van Geffen, J., Boersma, K. F., Eskes, H., Sneep, M., ter Linden, M., Zara, M., & Veefkind, J. P. (2020). S5P TROPOMI NO 2 slant column retrieval: method, stability, uncertainties and comparisons with OMI. Atmospheric Measurement Techniques. https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-1315-2020

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.