Open Access
Add to BibSonomy
Abstract
This erratum serves to correct an inadvertent error made during the presentation of results involving the mislabeling of the orientation of linear polarization perpendicular as parallel and vice versa in Appl. Opt. 59, 8314 (2020) [CrossRef] .
© 2021 Optical Society of America
Reference [1] contains a
Fig. 1. Reference values (black) and measurements (gray) of the four polarized light scattering measurement combinations from the LISST-VSF for 200 nm diameter polystyrene beads suspended in water. The expected reference values obtained from Mie scattering calculations are plotted from 0.09° to 160° and measured values obtained with the LISST-VSF are plotted from 16° to 155°, both with linear scaling of the $x$ x axis. Quality controlled but uncorrected replicate measurements obtained with the LISST-VSF (light gray lines, $N = 128$) and the median value (dark gray line) are shown.
All analysis, relationships, and final results relating polarized light scattering to particle characteristics remain unaffected. However, the interpretation of the orientation of polarization of incident and scattered light associated with $\beta _p^{\bot \parallel}(\psi)$, $\beta _p^{\parallel \parallel}(\psi)$, $\beta _p^{\bot \bot}(\psi)$, and $\beta _p^{\parallel \bot}(\psi)$, as well as the respective $\textit{CF\,}_f^{\epsilon \epsilon}(\psi)$, is incorrect. Of most significance, the polarization parameters identified as most suitable proxies for estimating $D_v^{90}$ and POC/SPM should be $\beta _p^{\bot \parallel}({{\rm{110^\circ}}})/\beta _p^{\bot \bot}({{\rm{110^\circ}}})$
Fig. 2. Final correction functions ${\rm CF}_f^{\epsilon \epsilon}(\psi)$ for LISST-VSF measurements of each polarized light scattering measurement combination, as indicated in legend, over the angular range 16°–150° determined from analysis of 100, 200, and 400 nm polystyrene bead suspensions.
Fig. 10. (a) The absolute values of the Pearson correlation coefficient $|R|$ obtained from the analysis of 606 relationships between particle size parameter $D_v^{90}$ and polarized light scattering parameters derived from the six unique polarization measurement combinations. Only superscript symbols of each measurement combination are shown. For example, $\parallel \bot /\parallel \parallel$ is equivalent to $\beta _p^{\parallel \bot}({{\psi _1}})/\beta _p^{\parallel \parallel}({{\psi _1}})$. See text for more detailed explanation of measurements. (b) Similar to panel (a) except that results are shown for the median absolute percent difference MdAPD determined from comparison of model-derived and measured $D_v^{90}$.
Fig. 12. (a) Particle size parameter $D_v^{90}$ and (b) particle composition parameter POC/SPM as functions of polarized light scattering metrics for seawater samples. Linear regression (a) and exponential regression (b) functions are plotted with black dashed lines. Bottom panels (c), (d) present model performance using model-derived values from regression from the panel above and the measured $D_v^{90}$ or POC/SPM, respectively. A type II linear regression of modeled versus measured data is plotted with a gray dashed line. A 1:1 dotted line is also plotted, which is nearly indistinguishable from the regression line. Data in (a), (c) are indicated by particulate composition-related parameter ${\tilde b_{\textit{bp}}}$ as shown in legend in (a), while (b), (d) are indicated by particle size parameter $D_v^{90}$as shown in legend in (b).
The mislabeling impacts the presentation of polarization variables in Sections 2.E, 3.A, 3.D, and 4. This includes Eq. (11), Figs. 1, 2, 10–12, and Table 4. In all cases except one, the relabeling of $\bot$ as $\parallel$, and vice versa, is sufficient to address the issue. In one instance toward the end of the first paragraph of Section 3.A, the mislabeling resulted in misinterpretation of Fig. 1. The corrected text should read: “When only parallel light is emitted, the values near 90º are predicted to be nearly zero, with the minimum value at 90º for $\hat \beta _p^{\parallel \parallel}(\psi)$ and at 95º for $\hat \beta _p^{\parallel \bot}(\psi)$. This is to be expected for light scattered by small particles. The Mie calculations show that the combination of perpendicularly polarized incident and detected light also produces very small values of $\hat \beta _p^{\bot \bot}(\psi)$ near 90º [Fig. 1(b)].”
To avoid any confusion, corrected Figs. 1, 2, 10, and 12, which had mislabeling of polarization parameters in axis or legends, are reprinted here. The original captions of these figures are correct. Figure 11 has, however, a mislabeling error in the figure caption.
REFERENCES
1. D. Koestner, D. Stramski, and R. A. Reynolds, “Polarized light scattering measurements as a means to characterize particle size and composition of natural assemblages of marine particles,” Appl. Opt. 59, 8314–8334 (2020). [CrossRef]
