{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02309344790547798, 'fraction_numerical': 0.01020408163265306, 'mean_word_length': 5.315254237288135, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Mediterranean sea level oscillations as a response to the atmospheric pressure variations, altimetric implications

The real sea level response to atmospheric pressure variations is quantified and compared with the one deduced from the isostatic assumption, which is normally used to correct the effect of the atmospheric pressure oscillations in the ocean, the so-called Inverse Barometer Correction (IBC). We have analysed the first four years of ERS-2 altimetric records in the Mediterranean Sea. We obtained the regression coefficients at each geographical point of the satellite tracks and in the crossover track points, estimating the relation between the surface atmospheric pressure and the sea level anomalies. The geographical distribution of the regression coefficients obtained, demonstrates that there are important local deviations from the hypothetical value (-0.998 cm/bar), being more evident when we reduce the time sampling from 35 days to 10.5 days. We have obtained the variance associated to the inverse barometer correction, and the one obtained by using the individual regression coefficients obtained at each geographical position in both, collinear and crossover method. We observe a variance reduction of approximately 30% in the sea level anomalies series, when barometric corrections are applied, in the case of collinear track method, and around 15% when we use the crossover track method. We have also quantified the difference in the variance reduction of the sea level anomalies when the standard IBC and the atmospheric pressure correction (use of the regression coefficients estimated on each geographical position, instead of the isostatic value: -0.998 cm/mbar) are applied. We also observe a reduction of approximately 2% in the variance when the atmospheric correction is applied, instead of IBC (in both cases, CM and XM).