of the single scatter albedo ω and the matrix of expansion coefficients Β l , and its (real-variable)~linearization L (Γ)is easy to establish from chain-rule differentiation:~ ~ + ~ − ~ + ~ −L ( Γ)= L(S ) S + S L(S ) ; (2.48)L(⎡L(ω)LM~ ± ⎧ ~~ ⎫ ± ~ T ~ ~ −1S ) = ⎢∑⎨Π(l,m)Bl+ Π(l,m)L(Bl) ⎬AΠ ( l,m)Ω= 22⎥Μl m⎣⎩ω⎭⎤⎦. (2.49)In Eq. (2.49), L (ω)= U and L (Bl) = Zlare the linearized optical property inputs (Eq. (2.33)).Next, we differentiate both the left and right eigensystems (2.37) to find:~ ⊥ ~ ~ ⊥ ~~ ⊥ 2 ~ ⊥L(Xα) Γ + XαL(Γ)= 2k αL(kα) Xα+ kαL(Xα) ; (2.50)~ ~ ~ ~~ 2 ~ΓL(Xα) + L(Γ)Xα= 2k αL(kα) Xα+ kαL(Xα) . (2.51)⊥We form a dot product by pre-multiplying (2.51) with the transpose vector X ~ α , rearranging toget:~ ⊥ ~ ~ ⊥ ~ ~ 2 ~ ⊥ ~ ~ ⊥ ~ ~2k αL(kα)〈Xα, Xα〉 − 〈 Xα, L(Γ)Xα〉 = kα〈 Xα, L(Xα)〉− 〈 Xα, ΓL(Xα)〉. (2.52)From the definitions in Eq. (2.37), we have:~ ⊥ ~ ~ ~ ⊥ ~ ~2 ~ ⊥ ~〈 Xα, ΓL(Xα)〉= 〈 XαΓ,L(Xα)〉= kα〈 Xα, L(Xα)〉, (2.53)and hence the right hand side of (2.52) is identically zero. We thus have:~ ⊥ ~〈 Xα, L(Γ~ ) Xα〉L ( kα) = ~ ⊥ ~ . (2.54)2k〈 X , X 〉αααNext, we substitute Eq. (2.54) in (2.52) to obtain the following 4N x 4N linear algebra problemfor each eigensolution linearization:~ ~ ~ΗαL ( Xα) = Cα; (2.55)~ ~ 2~Hα = Γ − k αE ; (2.56)~~ ~Cα= 2k αL(kα) Xα− L(Γ~ ) Xα. (2.57)Implementation of Eq. (2.55) “as is” is not possible due to the degeneracy of the eigenproblem,and we need additional constraints to find the unique solution for L ( X~α) . The treatment for realand complex solutions is different.~ ~Real solutions. The unit-modulus eigenvector normalization can be expressed as 〈 X , X 〉 α α= 1 indot-product notation. Linearizing, this yields one equation:~ ~ ~ ~L ( Xα) Xα+ XαL(Xα) = 0. (2.58)The solution procedure uses 4N −1 equations from (2.55), along with Eq. (2.58) to form aslightly modified linear system of rank 4N. This system is then solved by standard means usingthe DGETRF and DGETRS LU-decomposition routines from the LAPACK suite.22
This procedure was not used in the scalar LIDORT code [Spurr et al., 2001; Spurr, 2002]. Thisis because ASYMTX has no adjoint solution, so there is no determination of L ( k α) as in Eq.(2.54). Instead, LIDORT uses the complete set (2.55) in addition to the constraint (2.58) to forma system of rank N + 1 for the unknowns L( k α) and L ( X~α) .Complex solutions. In this case, Eq. (2.55) is a complex-variable system for both the real andimaginary parts of the linearized eigenvectors. There are 8N equations in all, but now we requiretwo constraint conditions to remove the eigenproblem arbitrariness. The first is Eq. (2.58). Thesecond condition is imposed by the following DGEEV normalization: for that element of aneigenvector with the largest real value, the corresponding imaginary part is always set to zero.Thus for an eigenvector X ~ , if element Re[X J ] = max{Re[X j ]} for j = 1,… 4N, then Im[X J ] = 0. Inthis case, it is also true that L(Im[X J ]) = 0. This is the second condition.The solution procedure is then (1) in Eq. (2.55) to strike out the row and column J in matrix Η ~αfor which the quantity Im[X J ] is zero, and strike out the corresponding row in the right-handvector C ~ α ; and (2) in the resulting 8N−1 system, replace one of the rows with the normalizationconstraint Eq. (2.58). L ( X~α) is then the solution of the resulting linear system.We have gone into detail here, as the above procedure for eigensolution differentiation is themost crucial step in the linearization process, and there are several points of departure from theequivalent procedure in the scalar case. Having derived the linearizations L( k α) and L ( X~α) , we~ ±complete this section by differentiating the auxiliary result in Eq. (2.44) to establish L ( W α) :~L(W±α1 ~) = M2−1⎡ L(kα) ~ + 1 ~ +⎤ ~ 1 ~ −1⎡~1 ~ +⎤ ~⎢m S ± L(S ) X( )2⎥ α + M ⎢E± S ⎥LXα. (2.59)⎣ kαkα⎦ 2 ⎣ kα⎦Finally, we have linearizations of the transmittance derivatives in Eqs. (2.45) and (2.46):L (exp[ −kαx])= −x{ L(kα) + kαL(x)} exp[ −kαx]. (2.60)Here, x and Δ n are proportional for an optically uniform layer, so thatx xLξ( x)= Lξ( Δn)= VξΔ Δ. (2.61)nn2.2.3. Particular Integral of the vector RTE, solar termSolving the RTE by substitutionIn the treatment of the particular integral solutions of the vector RTE, we use a more traditionalsubstitution method rather than the Green’s function formalism of Siewert [Siewert, 2000b]. Thisis mainly for reasons of clarity and ease of exposition. Referring to Eq. (2.23), inhomogeneoussource terms in the discrete ordinate directions are:Lm ω mmQn( x,± μi) = ∑ Pl( ± μi) BnlPl( −μ0)I0Tn−1exp( −λnx). (2.62)2l=m23
- Page 1: User’s GuideVLIDORTVersion 2.6Rob
- Page 5 and 6: Table of Contents1H1. Introduction
- Page 7 and 8: 1. Introduction to VLIDORT1.1. Hist
- Page 9 and 10: Table 1.1 Major features of LIDORT
- Page 11 and 12: In 2006, R. Spurr was invited to co
- Page 13: corrections, and sphericity correct
- Page 16 and 17: Matrix Π relates scattering and in
- Page 18 and 19: m⎛ P⎞l( μ)0 0 0⎜⎟mmm ⎜ 0
- Page 20 and 21: In the following sections, we suppr
- Page 24 and 25: Here T n−1 is the solar beam tran
- Page 26 and 27: ~ + ~ ~ (1)~ ~ + ~ ~ (2)~ ~ − ~ 1
- Page 28 and 29: The solution proceeds first by the
- Page 30 and 31: Linearizations. Derivatives of all
- Page 32 and 33: For the plane-parallel case, we hav
- Page 34 and 35: One of the features of the above ou
- Page 36 and 37: L↑↑ ↑k (cot n −cotn −1)[
- Page 38 and 39: Note the use of the profile-column
- Page 40 and 41: βl,aer(1)(2)fz1e1βl+ ( 1−f ) z2
- Page 42 and 43: For BRDF input, it is necessary for
- Page 44 and 45: streams were used in the half space
- Page 46 and 47: anded tri-diagonal matrix A contain
- Page 48 and 49: in place to aid with the LU-decompo
- Page 50 and 51: In earlier versions of LIDORT and V
- Page 53 and 54: 4. The VLIDORT 2.6 package4.1. Over
- Page 55 and 56: (discrete ordinates), so that dimen
- Page 57 and 58: Table 4.2 Summary of VLIDORT I/O Ty
- Page 59 and 60: Table 4.3. Module files in VLIDORT
- Page 61 and 62: Finally, modules vlidort_ls_correct
- Page 63 and 64: end program main_VLIDORT4.3.2. Conf
- Page 65 and 66: $(VLID_DEF_PATH)/vlidort_sup_brdf_d
- Page 67 and 68: Finally, the command to build the d
- Page 69 and 70: Here, “s” indicates you want to
- Page 71 and 72: The main difference between “vlid
- Page 73 and 74:
to both VLIDORT and the given VSLEA
- Page 75 and 76:
STATUS_INPUTREAD is equal to 4 (VLI
- Page 77 and 78:
5. ReferencesAnderson, E., Z. Bai,
- Page 79 and 80:
Mishchenko, M.I., and L.D. Travis,
- Page 81:
Stamnes K., S-C. Tsay, W. Wiscombe,
- Page 84 and 85:
Table A2: Type Structure VLIDORT_Fi
- Page 86 and 87:
DO_WRITE_FOURIER Logical (I) Flag f
- Page 88 and 89:
USER_LEVELS (o) Real*8 (IO) Array o
- Page 90 and 91:
angle s, Stokes parameter S, and di
- Page 92 and 93:
DO_SLEAVE_WFS Logical (IO) Flag for
- Page 94 and 95:
6.1.1.8. VLIDORT linearized outputs
- Page 96 and 97:
NFINELAYERS Integer Number of fine
- Page 98 and 99:
6.1.2.4. VLIDORT linearized modifie
- Page 100 and 101:
The output file contains (for all 3
- Page 102 and 103:
The first call is the baseline calc
- Page 104 and 105:
for a 2-parameter Gamma-function si
- Page 106 and 107:
Remark. In VLIDORT, the BRDF is a 4
- Page 108 and 109:
6.3.3.1. Input and output type stru
- Page 110 and 111:
Table C: Type Structure VBRDF_LinSu
- Page 112 and 113:
Special note regarding Cox-Munk typ
- Page 114 and 115:
squared parameter, so that Jacobian
- Page 116 and 117:
6.4. SLEAVE SupplementHere, the sur
- Page 118 and 119:
is possible to define Jacobians wit
- Page 120 and 121:
etween 0 and 90 degrees.N_USER_OBSG
- Page 122:
6.4.4.2 SLEAVE configuration file c