Impact of Radar Data Sampling on the Accuracy of Atmospheric Refractivity Inversions Over Marine Surfaces.

The turbulent nature of the marine atmospheric boundary layer and interactions across the air‐sea interface cause ever‐changing environmental conditions, including atmospheric properties that affect the index of refraction, or atmospheric refractivity. Variations in atmospheric refractivity lead to many types of anomalous propagation phenomena of electromagnetic (EM) signals; thus, improving performance of EM systems requires in situ knowledge of the refractivity. Inversion approaches to estimate refractivity rely on measured EM data; however, despite its importance, few studies have examined the influence of data density on the accuracy of refractivity inversions. This study applies a bistatic radar data inversion process to estimate atmospheric refractivity parameters in evaporative ducting conditions and examines the impacts of the sampling density of radar propagation loss data, and its source location, on accuracy of refractivity inversions. Genetic algorithms and a radar propagation model are used to perform the inversions. Numerical experiments examine various randomly distributed amounts of synthetic data from a 100‐m (altitude) by 60‐km (range) area. Three domains within this area are examined from which data were sourced. A data density of approximately 1% of the prediction domain yielded the smallest errors of refractivity parameters, and root mean square errors of refractivity and propagation loss. These error reductions are attributed to avoidance of nonunique solutions that likely impact lower data densities, supported by their classification as a misleading or difficult inverse problem. Generally, data sourced from long range result in lower refractivity and propagation loss root mean square errors compared to data sourced from other domains. Key Points: The density of data, randomly sampled within different domains, is varied to examine its affect on accuracy of refractivity inversionsRefractivity inversion accuracy is evaluated by errors in refractivity parameters, and root mean square errors of refractivity and propagationData density of approximately 1% of the propagation prediction space yielded the smallest refractivity errors and differences in propagation [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]