• Anderson, B., and J. B. Moore, 1979: Optimal Filtering. Information and System Sciences Series, Prentice-Hall, 357 pp.

  • Anderson, J., 2001: An ensemble adjustment Kalman filter for data assimilation. Mon. Wea. Rev., 129, 28842903.

  • Anderson, J., 2003: A local least squares framework for ensemble filtering. Mon. Wea. Rev., 131, 634642.

  • Bennett, A., 2002: Inverse Modeling of the Ocean and Atmosphere. Cambridge University Press, 234 pp.

  • Burgers, G., P. Jan van Leeuwen, and G. Evensen, 1998: Analysis scheme in the ensemble Kalman filter. Mon. Wea. Rev., 126, 17191724.

  • Courtier, P., and O. Talagrand, 1990: Variational assimilation of meteorological observations with the direct and adjoint shallow-water equations. Tellus, 42, 531549.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Dee, D., 1991: Simplification of the Kalman filter for meteorological data assimilation. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 117, 365384.

  • Doucet, A., S. Godsill, and C. Andrieu, 2000: On sequential Monte Carlo sampling methods for Bayesian filtering. Stat. Comput., 10, 197208.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Doucet, A., N. De Freitas, and N. Gordon, 2001: Sequential Monte Carlo Methods in Practice. Springer, 581 pp.

  • Evensen, G., 1994: Sequential data assimilation with a nonlinear quasi-geostrophic model using Monte Carlo methods to forecast error statistics. J. Geophys. Res., 99, 10 14310 162.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Evensen, G., 2003: The ensemble Kalman filter: Theoretical formulation and practical implementation. Ocean Dyn., 53, 343367.

  • Gershgorin, B., and A. Majda, 2010: Filtering a nonlinear slow–fast system with strong fast forcing. Commun. Math. Sci., 8, 6792.

  • Gordon, N., D. Salmond, and A. Smith, 1993: Novel approach to nonlinear/non-Gaussian Bayesian state estimation. IEE Proc., 140F, 107113.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Hamill, T., and C. Snyder, 2000: A hybrid ensemble Kalman filter–3D variational analysis scheme. Mon. Wea. Rev., 128, 29052919.

  • Hamill, T., J. Whitaker, and C. Snyder, 2001: Distance-dependent filtering of background error covariance estimates in an ensemble Kalman filter. Mon. Wea. Rev., 129, 27762790.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Hoteit, I., B. Cornuelle, A. Köhl, and D. Stammer, 2005a: Treating strong adjoint sensitivities in tropical eddy-permitting variational data assimilation. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 131, 36593682.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Hoteit, I., G. Korres, and G. Triantafyllou, 2005b: Comparison of extended and ensemble based Kalman filters with low and high resolution primitive equation ocean models. Nonlinear Processes Geophys., 12, 755765.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Hoteit, I., D. Pham, G. Triantafyllou, and G. Korres, 2008: Particle Kalman filtering for data assimilation in meteorology and oceanography. Proc. Third WCRP Int. Conf. on Reanalysis. Tokyo, Japan, WCRP, 1–6.

  • Houtekamer, P., and H. Mitchell, 2005: Ensemble Kalman filtering. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 131, 32693289.

  • Jardak, M., I. Navon, and M. Zupanski, 2010: Comparison of sequential data assimilation methods for the Kuramoto–Sivashinsky equation. Int. J. Numer. Methods Fluids, 62, 374402.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Kalnay, E., H. Li, T. Miyoshi, S.-C. Yang, and J. Ballabrera-Poy, 2007: 4-D-Var or ensemble Kalman filter? Tellus, 59A, 758773.

  • Kepert, J. D., 2004: On ensemble representation of the observation-error covariance in the ensemble Kalman filter. Ocean Dyn., 54, 561569.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Kivman, G., 2003: Sequential parameter estimation for stochastic systems. Nonlinear Processes Geophys., 10, 253259.

  • Le Dimet, F., and O. Talagrand, 1986: Variational algorithms for analysis and assimilation of meteorological observations: Theoretical aspects. Tellus, 38, 97110.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lewis, J. M., and J. Derber, 1985: The use of adjoint equations to solve a variational adjustment problem with advective constraints. Tellus, 37, 309322.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lorenc, A., 2003: The potential of the ensemble Kalman filter for NWP—A comparison with 4D-Var. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 129, 31833203.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lorenz, E., 1986: On the existence of a slow manifold. J. Atmos. Sci., 43, 15471557.

  • Lorenz, E., 1991: Dimension of weather and climate attractors. Nature, 353, 241244.

  • McLachlan, G., and D. Peel, 2000: Finite Mixture Models. John Wiley & Sons, 419 pp.

  • Mitchell, H., and P. Houtekamer, 2000: An adaptive ensemble Kalman filter. Mon. Wea. Rev., 128, 416433.

  • Mitchell, H., P. Houtekamer, and G. Pellerin, 2002: Ensemble size, balance, and model-error representation in an ensemble Kalman filter. Mon. Wea. Rev., 130, 27912808.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Nakano, S., G. Ueno, and T. Higuchi, 2007: Merging particle filter for sequential data assimilation. Nonlinear Processes Geophys., 14, 395408.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Neef, L. J., S. M. Polavarapu, and T. G. Shepherd, 2006: Four-dimensional data assimilation and balanced dynamics. J. Atmos. Sci., 63, 18401858.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Neef, L. J., S. M. Polavarapu, and T. G. Shepherd, 2009: A low-order model investigation of the analysis of gravity waves in the ensemble Kalman filter. J. Atmos. Sci., 66, 17171734.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Ott, E., and Coauthors, 2004: A local ensemble Kalman filter for atmospheric data assimilation. Tellus, 56A, 415428.

  • Pham, D., 2001: Stochastic methods for sequential data assimilation in strongly nonlinear systems. Mon. Wea. Rev., 129, 11941207.

  • Polavarapu, S., M. Tanguay, and L. Fillion, 2000: Four-dimensional variational data assimilation with digital filter initialization. Mon. Wea. Rev., 128, 24912510.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Pu, Z., and J. Hacker, 2009: Ensemble-based Kalman filters in strongly nonlinear dynamics. Adv. Atmos. Sci., 26, 373380.

  • Robinson, A. R., and P. Lermusiaux, 2004: Prediction systems with data assimilation for coupled ocean science and ocean acoustics. Theoretical and Computational Acoustics, D. A. Tolstoy et al., Eds., World Scientific, 325–342.

  • Saujani, S., and T. G. Shepherd, 2006: A unified theory of balance in the extratropics. J. Fluid Mech., 569, 447464.

  • Snyder, C., T. Bengtsson, P. Bickel, and J. Anderson, 2008: Obstacles to high-dimensional particle filtering. Mon. Wea. Rev., 136, 46294640.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Song, H., I. Hoteit, B. Cornuelle, and A. Subramanian, 2010: An adaptive approach to mitigate background covariance limitations in the ensemble Kalman filter. Mon. Wea. Rev., 138, 28252845.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Szunyogh, I., E. Kostelich, G. Gyarmati, D. Patil, B. R. Hunt, E. Kalnay, E. Ott, and J. A. Yorke, 2005: Assessing a local ensemble Kalman filter: Perfect model experiments with the National Centers for Environmental Prediction global model. Tellus, 57A, 528545.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Tippett, M., J. Anderson, C. H. Bishop, T. M. Hamill, and J. Whitaker, 2003: Ensemble square root filters. Mon. Wea. Rev., 131, 14851490.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Todling, R., 1999: Estimation theory and foundations of atmospheric data assimilation. DAO Office Note 1999-01, 187 pp.

  • Todling, R., and S. E. Cohn, 1994: Suboptimal schemes for atmospheric data assimilation based on the Kalman filter. Mon. Wea. Rev., 122, 25302557.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Van Leeuwen, P. J., 2009: Particle filtering in geophysical systems. Mon. Wea. Rev., 137, 40894114.

  • Van Leeuwen, P. J., 2010: Nonlinear data assimilation in geosciences: An extremely efficient particle filter. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 136, 19911999.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Wirosoetisno, D., and T. G. Shepherd, 2000: Averaging, slaving and balance dynamics in a simple atmospheric model. Physica D, 141, 3753.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Zou, Y., and R. Ghanem, 2005: A multiscale data assimilation with the ensemble Kalman filter. Multiscale Model. Simul., 3, 131150.

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 62 33 1
PDF Downloads 26 9 0

Linear versus Nonlinear Filtering with Scale-Selective Corrections for Balanced Dynamics in a Simple Atmospheric Model

View More View Less
  • 1 Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California, San Diego, San Diego, California
  • | 2 King Abdullah University of Science and Technology, Thuwal, Saudi Arabia
  • | 3 Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California, San Diego, San Diego, California
  • | 4 University of California, Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, California
Restricted access

Abstract

This paper investigates the role of the linear analysis step of the ensemble Kalman filters (EnKF) in disrupting the balanced dynamics in a simple atmospheric model and compares it to a fully nonlinear particle-based filter (PF). The filters have a very similar forecast step but the analysis step of the PF solves the full Bayesian filtering problem while the EnKF analysis only applies to Gaussian distributions. The EnKF is compared to two flavors of the particle filter with different sampling strategies, the sequential importance resampling filter (SIRF) and the sequential kernel resampling filter (SKRF). The model admits a chaotic vortical mode coupled to a comparatively fast gravity wave mode. It can also be configured either to evolve on a so-called slow manifold, where the fast motion is suppressed, or such that the fast-varying variables are diagnosed from the slow-varying variables as slaved modes. Identical twin experiments show that EnKF and PF capture the variables on the slow manifold well as the dynamics is very stable. PFs, especially the SKRF, capture slaved modes better than the EnKF, implying that a full Bayesian analysis estimates the nonlinear model variables better. The PFs perform significantly better in the fully coupled nonlinear model where fast and slow variables modulate each other. This suggests that the analysis step in the PFs maintains the balance in both variables much better than the EnKF. It is also shown that increasing the ensemble size generally improves the performance of the PFs but has less impact on the EnKF after a sufficient number of members have been used.

Corresponding author address: Aneesh C. Subramanian, 9500 Gilman Dr., La Jolla, CA 92093-0224. E-mail: acsubram@ucsd.edu

Abstract

This paper investigates the role of the linear analysis step of the ensemble Kalman filters (EnKF) in disrupting the balanced dynamics in a simple atmospheric model and compares it to a fully nonlinear particle-based filter (PF). The filters have a very similar forecast step but the analysis step of the PF solves the full Bayesian filtering problem while the EnKF analysis only applies to Gaussian distributions. The EnKF is compared to two flavors of the particle filter with different sampling strategies, the sequential importance resampling filter (SIRF) and the sequential kernel resampling filter (SKRF). The model admits a chaotic vortical mode coupled to a comparatively fast gravity wave mode. It can also be configured either to evolve on a so-called slow manifold, where the fast motion is suppressed, or such that the fast-varying variables are diagnosed from the slow-varying variables as slaved modes. Identical twin experiments show that EnKF and PF capture the variables on the slow manifold well as the dynamics is very stable. PFs, especially the SKRF, capture slaved modes better than the EnKF, implying that a full Bayesian analysis estimates the nonlinear model variables better. The PFs perform significantly better in the fully coupled nonlinear model where fast and slow variables modulate each other. This suggests that the analysis step in the PFs maintains the balance in both variables much better than the EnKF. It is also shown that increasing the ensemble size generally improves the performance of the PFs but has less impact on the EnKF after a sufficient number of members have been used.

Corresponding author address: Aneesh C. Subramanian, 9500 Gilman Dr., La Jolla, CA 92093-0224. E-mail: acsubram@ucsd.edu
Save