Evan Mason

Dr. Evan Mason

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

21Years (2006-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 December 2009 in Progress in Oceanography
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
JAJavier Arístegui
Javier Arístegui
EBEric D. Barton
Eric D. Barton
Xosé Antón Álvarez-SalgadoXosé Antón Álvarez-Salgado
Xosé Antón Álvarez-Salgado
A. Miguel Piecho-SantosA. Miguel Piecho-Santos
A. Miguel Piecho-Santos
Francisco FiguierasFrancisco Figuieras
Francisco Figuieras
HDHervé Demarcq
Hervé Demarcq

1 May 2014 in Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
EMEvan Mason
Evan Mason
APAnanda Pascual
Ananda Pascual
JMJames C. McWilliams
James C. McWilliams
This paper presents a software tool that enables the identification and automated tracking of oceanic eddies observed with satellite altimetry in user-specified regions throughout the global ocean. As input, the code requires sequential maps of sea level anomalies such as those provided by Archiving, Validation, and Interpretation of Satellite Oceanographic (AVISO) data. Outputs take the form of (i) data files containing eddy properties, including position, radius, amplitude, and azimuthal (geostrophic) speed; and (ii) sequential image maps showing sea surface height maps with active eddy centers and tracks overlaid. The results given are from a demonstration in the Canary Basin region of the northeast Atlantic and are comparable with a published global eddy track database. Some discrepancies between the two datasets include eddy radius magnitude, and the distributions of eddy births and deaths. The discrepancies may be related to differences in the eddy identification methods, and also possibly to differences in the smoothing of the sea surface height maps. The code is written in Python and is made freely available under a GNU license (http://www.imedea.uib.es/users/emason/py-eddy-tracker/).

1 January 2010 in Ocean Modelling
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
EMEvan Mason
Evan Mason
JMJeroen Molemaker
Jeroen Molemaker
ASAlexander F. Shchepetkin
Alexander F. Shchepetkin
FCFrancois Colas
Francois Colas
JMJames C. McWilliams
James C. McWilliams
PSPablo Sangrà
Pablo Sangrà

10 March 2022 in Earth System Science Data
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
CPCori Pegliasco
Cori Pegliasco
ADAntoine Delepoulle
Antoine Delepoulle
EMEvan Mason
Evan Mason
RMRosemary Morrow
Rosemary Morrow
YFYannice Faugère
Yannice Faugère
GDGerald Dibarboure
Gerald Dibarboure
This paper presents the new global Mesoscale Eddy Trajectory Atlases (META3.1exp DT all-satellites, https://doi.org/10.24400/527896/a01-2021.001, Pegliasco et al., 2021a; and META3.1exp DT two-satellites, https://doi.org/10.24400/527896/a01-2021.002, Pegliasco et al., 2021b), composed of eddy identifications and trajectories produced with altimetric maps. The detection method used is inherited from the py-eddy-tracker (PET) algorithm developed by Mason et al. (2014), and is optimized to efficiently manage large datasets, and thus long time series. These products are an improvement on the earlier META2.0 product, which was produced by SSALTO/DUACS and distributed by AVISO+ (https://aviso.altimetry.fr, last access: 8 March 2022) with support from CNES, in collaboration with Oregon State University and support from NASA, and based on the Chelton et al. (2011) code. META3.1exp provides supplementary eddy information, such as eddy shapes, eddy edges, maximum speed contours, and mean eddy speed profiles from the center to the periphery. The tracking algorithm is based on overlapping contours, includes virtual observations, and acts as a filter with respect to the shortest trajectories. The absolute dynamic topography (ADT) field is now used for eddy detection, instead of the previous sea level anomaly (SLA) maps, in order to better represent the dynamics in the more energetic oceanic regions and in the vicinity of coasts and islands. To evaluate the impact of the changes from META2.0 to META3.1exp, a comparison methodology has been applied. The similarity coefficient (SC) is based on the ratio of the eddy overlaps to their cumulative area, and allows for extensive comparison of the different datasets in terms of geographic distribution, statistics on the main physical characteristics, changes in the lifetimes of the trajectories, etc. After evaluating the impact of each change separately, we conclude that the major differences between META3.1exp and META2.0 are due to the change in the detection algorithm. META3.1exp contains smaller eddies and trajectories lasting at least 10 d; these were not available in the META2.0 product. Nevertheless, 55 % of the structures in META2.0 are similar to META3.1exp, thereby ensuring continuity between the two products and their physical characteristics. Geographically, the eddy distributions differ mainly in the strong current regions, where the mean dynamic topography (MDT) gradients are sharp. The additional information on the eddy contours allows for more accurate collocation of mesoscale structures with data from other sources, and so META3.1exp is recommended for multi-disciplinary application.

1 December 2009 in Deep Sea Research Part I: Oceanographic Research Papers
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PSPablo Sangrà
Pablo Sangrà
APAnanda Pascual
Ananda Pascual
ÁRÁngel Rodríguez-Santana
Ángel Rodríguez-Santana
FMFrancisco Machín
Francisco Machín
EMEvan Mason
Evan Mason
MAMaricel Auladell
Maricel Auladell

1 June 2011 in Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
EMEvan Mason
Evan Mason
FCFrancois Colas
Francois Colas
JMJeroen Molemaker
Jeroen Molemaker
ASAlexander F. Shchepetkin
Alexander F. Shchepetkin
CTCharles Troupin
Charles Troupin
PSPablo Sangrà
Pablo Sangrà