Comparative Analysis and Optimal Selection of Calibration Functions in Pure Rotational Raman Lidar Technique
The pure rotational Raman (PRR) lidar technique relies on calibration functions (CFs) to extract temperature information from raw detection data. The choice of CF significantly impacts the accuracy of the retrieved temperature. In this study, we propose a method that combines multiple Monte Carlo si...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2024-10-01
|
| Series: | Remote Sensing |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2072-4292/16/19/3690 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | The pure rotational Raman (PRR) lidar technique relies on calibration functions (CFs) to extract temperature information from raw detection data. The choice of CF significantly impacts the accuracy of the retrieved temperature. In this study, we propose a method that combines multiple Monte Carlo simulation experiments with a statistical analysis, and we first conduct simulated comparisons of the calibration effects of different CFs while considering the impact of noise. We categorized ten common CFs into four groups based on their functional form and the number of calibration coefficients. Based on functional form, specifically, we defined 1/<i>T</i> = f(ln<i>Q</i>) as a forward calibration function (FCF) and ln<i>Q</i> = g(1/<i>T</i>) as a backward calibration function (BCF). Here, T denotes temperature, and Q denotes the signal intensity ratio. Their performance within and outside the calibration interval is compared across different integration times, smoothing methods, and reference temperature ranges. The results indicate that CFs of the same category exhibit similar calibration effects, while those of different categories exhibit notable differences. Within the calibration interval, the FCF performs better, especially with more coefficients. However, outside the calibration interval, the linear calibration function (which can be considered a two-coefficient FCF) has an obvious advantage. Conclusions based on the simulation results are validated with actual data, and the factors influencing calibration errors are discussed. Utilizing these findings to guide CF selection can enhance the accuracy and stability of PRR lidar detection. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2072-4292 |