Intercomparison of flux-, gradient-, and variance-based optical turbulence ( 2) parameterizations.

For free-space optical communication or ground-based optical astronomy, ample data of optical turbulence strength ( 2) are imperative but typically scarce. Turbulence conditions are strongly site dependent, so their accurate quantification requires in situ measurements or numerical weather simulations. If 2 is not measured directly (e.g., with a scintillometer), 2 parameterizations must be utilized to estimate it from meteorological observations or model output. Even though various parameterizations exist in the literature, their relative performance is unknown. We fill this knowledge gap by performing a systematic three-way comparison of a flux-, gradient-, and variance-based parameterization. Each parameterization is applied to both observed and simulated meteorological variables, and the resulting 2 estimates are compared against observed 2 from two scintillometers. The variance-based parameterization yields the overall best performance, and unlike other approaches, its application is not limited to the lowest part of the atmospheric boundary layer (i.e. the surface layer). We also show that 2 estimated from the output of the Weather Research and Forecasting model aligns well with observations, highlighting the value of mesoscale models for optical turbulence modeling.