Open Access
Issue
EPJ Web Conf.
Volume 237, 2020
The 29th International Laser Radar Conference (ILRC 29)
Article Number 08027
Number of page(s) 4
Section Lidar Data Analysis and Models
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/202023708027
Published online 07 July 2020
  1. Chaxel E, et al., 2009: Ozone production from Grenoble city during the August 2003 heat wave. Atmos. Environ., 43(31):4784-4792. [Google Scholar]
  2. Angevine, W.M., et al., 2004: Coastal Boundary Layer Influence on Pollutant Transport in New England. J. Appl. Meteor., 43, 1425–1437. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  3. Banta, R M, et al., 2005: A Bad Air Day in Houston. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 86(5):657-669. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  4. Grell, G. A., et al., 2005: Fully coupled “online” chemistry within the WRF model, Atmos. Environ., 39, 6957–6975. [Google Scholar]
  5. Zhao, K., et al., 2019: A high-resolution modeling study of a heat wave-driven ozone exceedance event in New York City and surrounding regions, Atmos. Environ., 199, 368–379. [Google Scholar]
  6. Gan, C. M., et al., 2010: Statistical comparison between hysplit sounding and lidar observation of planetary boundary layer characteristics over New York City, SPIE Proc., vol. 7684-57 [Google Scholar]
  7. Young, R. D. et al. 2017: Langley mobile ozone lidar: ozone and aerosol atmospheric profiling for air quality research, Appl. Opt. 56, 721-730. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Farris, B. Met al., 2019: Demonstration of an off-axis parabolic receiver for near-range retrieval of lidar ozone profiles, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 12, 363-370. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.