Evaluation of Scattering Correction Methods for Reflective-Tube Absorption Coefficient Meters

Zhiqi Liang; Lianbo Hu; Shuguo Chen

doi:10.3788/AOS241516

Acta Optica Sinica, Volume. 45, Issue 6, 0601009(2025)

Evaluation of Scattering Correction Methods for Reflective-Tube Absorption Coefficient Meters

Zhiqi Liang1... Lianbo Hu2,3,*, and Shuguo Chen1,23 |Show fewer author(s)

¹College of Marine Technology, Faculty of Information Science and Engineering, Ocean University of China, Qingdao 266100, Shandong , China

²Sanya Oceanographic Institution, Ocean University of China, Sanya 572000, Hainan , China

³Sanya Marine Laboratory, Sanya 572000, Hainan , China

show less

Abstract Get PDF(in Chinese)

Figures & Tables(16)

Fig. 1. Distribution of data collection stations in the South China Sea (star represents typical station)

Download full size

Fig. 2. Distribution of data collection stations in the Bohai Sea, Yellow Sea, and East China Sea (stars represent typical stations)

Download full size

Fig. 3. Device calibration results. (a) Pure water absorption coefficient by ac-s after calibration; (b) pure water absorption coefficient by OSCAR after calibration

Download full size

Fig. 4. Comparison of absorption spectra before and after correction by different scattering methods at T4 station in the South China Sea

Download full size

Fig. 5. Comparison of ac-s measured absorption coefficient before and after scattering correction at eight typical ocean color bands (412, 440, 488, 510, 532, 555, 650, 676 nm) in the South China Sea

Download full size

Fig. 6. Comparison of absorption spectra before and after correction by different scattering correction methods at T24 station in the Bohai Sea

Download full size

Fig. 7. Comparison of ac-9 measured absorption coefficients using different scattering correction methods in the Bohai Sea

Download full size

Fig. 8. Comparison of absorption spectra before and after correction by different scattering correction methods at T10 station in the Yellow Sea

Download full size

Fig. 9. Comparison of ac-9 measured absorption coefficients using different scattering correction methods in the Yellow Sea

Download full size

Fig. 10. Comparison of absorption spectra before and after correction by different scattering correction methods at T43 station in the East China Sea

Download full size

Fig. 11. Comparison of ac-9 measured absorption coefficients using different scattering correction methods in the East China Sea

Download full size

Table 1. Absorption coefficient scattering correction methods

View table

Table 1. Absorption coefficient scattering correction methods

Method	Scattering error
Baseline^［18］	$a_{m t s} (λ_{N I R})$
Proportion^［18］	$\frac{a_{m t s} (λ_{N I R})}{c_{m t s} (λ_{N I R}) - a_{m t s} (λ_{N I R})} [c_{m t s} (λ) - a_{m t s} (λ)]$
Semi-empirical^［23］	$[a_{m t s} (715) - a (715)] \frac{c_{m t s} (λ) - a_{m t s} (λ)}{c_{m t s} (715) - a (715)}$
Iterative^［21-22］	$f_{a} (λ) b_{p} (λ)$
VSF^［17］	$(2 π \int_{0}^{π} s i n (θ) β (θ, 515) W (θ) d θ) \times [\frac{c_{m t s} (λ) - a_{m t s} (λ)}{c_{m t s} (515) - a_{m t s} (515)}]$

Table 2. Relative error of ac-s measured absorption coefficients at eight typical ocean color bands after correction by different scattering correction methods in the South China Sea

View table

Table 2. Relative error of ac-s measured absorption coefficients at eight typical ocean color bands after correction by different scattering correction methods in the South China Sea

Wavelength /nm	412	440	488	510	532	555	650	676	Mean
Baseline	23.45	17.10	17.16	19.47	21.10	23.67	37.36	41.06	25.05
Proportion	42.67	28.84	55.25	70.56	82.47	94.62	98.09	67.37	67.48
Semi-empirical	26.52	21.00	14.04	25.18	33.77	41.97	68.54	57.03	36.01
Iterative	57.37	61.01	55.74	60.92	70.02	79.65	112.86	161.54	82.39
VSF	32.38	32.01	15.79	13.00	14.28	19.93	32.84	25.66	23.24
ac-s	85.19	89.04	86.60	93.80	104.94	116.53	152.86	198.47	115.93

Table 3. Relative error of ac-9 measured absorption coefficients after correction by different scattering correction methods in the Bohai Sea

View table

Table 3. Relative error of ac-9 measured absorption coefficients after correction by different scattering correction methods in the Bohai Sea

Wavelength /nm	412	440	488	510	532	555	650	676	Mean
Baseline	23.68	29.31	37.43	44.64	50.95	53.45	60.68	50.75	46.74
Proportion	9.18	12.66	16.92	19.72	20.90	29.83	48.04	56.51	29.22
Semi-empirical	17.57	19.84	22.08	23.30	23.66	26.05	30.07	30.15	25.02
Iterative	17.32	17.99	26.42	35.79	45.84	46.43	61.37	43.91	36.88
ac-9	35.69	45.45	61.79	77.53	92.83	99.55	127.88	99.37	86.34

Table 4. Relative error of ac-9 measured absorption coefficients after correction by different scattering correction methods in the Yellow Sea

View table

Table 4. Relative error of ac-9 measured absorption coefficients after correction by different scattering correction methods in the Yellow Sea

Wavelength /nm	412	440	488	510	532	555	650	676	Mean
Baseline	12.67	16.07	20.55	26.91	30.21	35.30	48.86	38.71	30.94
Proportion	6.56	8.88	11.87	16.21	18.80	24.00	41.53	40.88	23.17
Semi-empirical	13.11	16.09	20.49	26.03	29.38	34.74	51.30	43.70	31.68
Iterative	23.22	26.16	37.14	48.34	55.88	67.95	111.12	103.52	59.17
ac-9	34.38	44.49	60.32	77.11	88.79	107.83	171.92	155.36	100.83

Table 5. Relative error of ac-9 measured absorption coefficients after correction by different scattering correction methods in the East China Sea

View table

Table 5. Relative error of ac-9 measured absorption coefficients after correction by different scattering correction methods in the East China Sea

Wavelength /nm	412	440	488	510	532	555	650	676	Mean
Baseline	18.65	23.04	28.61	35.36	39.53	45.87	56.55	48.83	39.69
Proportion	6.91	8.94	11.92	15.33	18.31	22.96	43.94	46.75	24.02
Semi-empirical	7.61	8.82	10.48	13.09	14.80	17.28	20.92	17.59	14.71
Iterative	30.40	45.90	55.21	76.18	90.85	108.75	131.62	104.76	80.46
ac-9	53.97	68.39	86.07	106.33	119.38	138.31	175.87	153.74	121.16

Tools

Get Citation

Copy Citation Text

Zhiqi Liang, Lianbo Hu, Shuguo Chen. Evaluation of Scattering Correction Methods for Reflective-Tube Absorption Coefficient Meters[J]. Acta Optica Sinica, 2025, 45(6): 0601009

Download Citation

EndNote(RIS)BibTex Plain Text

Set citation alerts for article

Save article for my favorites

Paper Information

Category: Atmospheric Optics and Oceanic Optics

Received: Sep. 4, 2024

Accepted: Nov. 6, 2024

Published Online: Mar. 26, 2025

The Author Email: Hu Lianbo (hulb@ouc.edu.cn)

DOI:10.3788/AOS241516

Topics

laser devices and laser physics

Lasers and Laser Optics

Laser physics

laser manufacturing

Instrumentation, Measurement and Metrology

Table 1. Absorption coefficient scattering correction methods

Table 1. Absorption coefficient scattering correction methods

Table 2. Relative error of ac-s measured absorption coefficients at eight typical ocean color bands after correction by different scattering correction methods in the South China Sea

Table 2. Relative error of ac-s measured absorption coefficients at eight typical ocean color bands after correction by different scattering correction methods in the South China Sea

Table 3. Relative error of ac-9 measured absorption coefficients after correction by different scattering correction methods in the Bohai Sea

Table 3. Relative error of ac-9 measured absorption coefficients after correction by different scattering correction methods in the Bohai Sea

Table 4. Relative error of ac-9 measured absorption coefficients after correction by different scattering correction methods in the Yellow Sea

Table 4. Relative error of ac-9 measured absorption coefficients after correction by different scattering correction methods in the Yellow Sea

Table 5. Relative error of ac-9 measured absorption coefficients after correction by different scattering correction methods in the East China Sea

Table 5. Relative error of ac-9 measured absorption coefficients after correction by different scattering correction methods in the East China Sea

微信扫一扫：分享