• Abramov, R. V., and A. J. Majda, 2009: A new algorithm for low-frequency climate response. J. Atmos. Sci., 66, 286309, doi:10.1175/2008JAS2813.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Bell, T. L., 1980: Climate sensitivity from fluctuation–dissipation: Simple model tests. J. Atmos. Sci., 37, 17001707, doi:10.1175/1520-0469(1980)037<1700:CSFFDS>2.0.CO;2.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Butler, A. H., D. W. J. Thompson, and R. Heikes, 2010: The steady-state atmospheric circulation response to climate change–like thermal forcings in a simple general circulation model. J. Climate, 23, 34743474, doi:10.1175/2010JCLI3228.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Chan, C. J., and R. A. Plumb, 2009: The response of the troposphere to stratospheric perturbations and its dependence on the state of the troposphere. J. Atmos. Sci., 66, 21072115, doi:10.1175/2009JAS2937.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Cooper, F. C., and P. H. Haynes, 2011: Climate sensitivity via a nonparametric fluctuation–dissipation theorem. J. Atmos. Sci., 68, 937953, doi:10.1175/2010JAS3633.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • DelSole, T., 1996: Can quasigeostrophic turbulence be modeled stochastically? J. Atmos. Sci., 53, 16171633, doi:10.1175/1520-0469(1996)053<1617:CQTBMS>2.0.CO;2.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Fuchs, D., S. Sherwood, and D. Hernandez, 2015: An exploration of multivariate fluctuation dissipation operators and their response to sea surface temperature perturbations. J. Atmos. Sci., 72, 472486, doi:10.1175/JAS-D-14-0077.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gerber, E. P., S. Voronin, and L. M. Polvani, 2008: Testing the annular mode autocorrelation time scale in simple atmospheric general circulation models. Mon. Wea. Rev., 136, 15231535, doi:10.1175/2007MWR2211.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gritsun, A., and G. Branstator, 2007: Climate response using a three-dimensional operator based on the fluctuation–dissipation theorem. J. Atmos. Sci., 64, 25582575, doi:10.1175/JAS3943.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Leith, C. E., 1975: Climate response and fluctuation dissipation. J. Atmos. Sci., 32, 20222026, doi:10.1175/1520-0469(1975)032<2022:CRAFD>2.0.CO;2.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lorenz, D. J., and J. L. Hartmann, 2001: Eddy–zonal flow feedback in the Southern Hemisphere. J. Atmos. Sci., 58, 33123327, doi:10.1175/1520-0469(2001)058<3312:EZFFIT>2.0.CO;2.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Majda, A. J., R. Abramov, and M. Grote, 2005: Information Theory and Stochastics for Multiscale Nonlinear Systems. American Mathematical Society, 133 pp.

  • Majda, A. J., B. Gershgorin, and Y. Yuan, 2010: Low-frequency climate response and fluctuation–dissipation theorems: Theory and practice. J. Atmos. Sci., 67, 11861201, doi:10.1175/2009JAS3264.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Martynov, R. S., and Y. M. Nechepurenko, 2004: Finding the response matrix for a discrete linear stochastic dynamical system. Comput. Math. Math. Phys., 44, 771781, doi:10.1134/S0965542506070062.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • North, G. R., T. L. Bell, R. F. Calahan, and F. J. Moeng, 1982: Sampling errors in the estimation of empirical orthogonal functions. Mon. Wea. Rev., 110, 699706, doi:10.1175/1520-0493(1982)110<0699:SEITEO>2.0.CO;2.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Ring, M. J., and R. A. Plumb, 2008: The response of a simplified GCM to axisymmetric forcings: Applicability of the fluctuation–dissipation theorem. J. Atmos. Sci., 65, 38803898, doi:10.1175/2008JAS2773.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Wilks, D. S., 2006: Statistical Methods in the Atmospheric Sciences. 2nd ed. International Geophysics Series, Vol. 91, Academic Press, 648 pp.

  • Zurita-Gotor, P., 2014: On the sensitivity of zonal index persistence to friction. J. Atmos. Sci., 71, 37883800, doi:10.1175/JAS-D-14-0067.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Zurita-Gotor, P., J. Blanco-Fuentes, and E. P. Gerber, 2014: The impact of baroclinic eddy feedback on the persistence of jet variability in the two-layer model. J. Atmos. Sci., 71, 410429, doi:10.1175/JAS-D-13-0102.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 271 151 10
PDF Downloads 248 148 17

Applying the Fluctuation–Dissipation Theorem to a Two-Layer Model of Quasigeostrophic Turbulence

View More View Less
  • 1 Program in Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey
  • | 2 NOAA/Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory, Princeton, New Jersey
  • | 3 Universidad Complutense de Madrid, and Instituto de Geociencias, Madrid, Spain
Restricted access

Abstract

The fluctuation–dissipation theorem (FDT) provides a means of calculating the response of a dynamical system to a small force by constructing a linear operator that depends only on data from the internal variability of the unperturbed system. Here the FDT is used to estimate the response of a two-layer quasigeostrophic model to two zonally symmetric torques, both barotropic, with the same sign of the forcing in the two layers, and baroclinic, with opposite sign forcing in the two layers. The supercriticality of the model is also varied to test how the FDT fares, as this parameter is varied. To perform the FDT calculations the data are decomposed onto empirical orthogonal functions (EOFs) and only those EOFs that are well resolved are retained in the FDT calculations. In the barotropic case good qualitative estimates are obtained for all values of the supercriticality, though the FDT consistently overestimates the response, perhaps because of significant non-Gaussian behavior present in the model. Nevertheless, this adds to the evidence that the annular-mode time scale plays an important role in determining the response of the midlatitudes to small perturbations. The baroclinic case is more challenging for the FDT. However, by constructing different bases with which to calculate the EOFs, it is shown that the issue in this case is that the baroclinic variability is poorly sampled, not that the FDT fails. The strategies developed in order to generate these estimates may be applicable to situations in which the FDT is applied to larger systems.

Corresponding author address: Nicholas Lutsko, Program in Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, Princeton University, 300 Forrestal Rd., Princeton, NJ 08540. E-mail: lutsko@princeton.edu

Abstract

The fluctuation–dissipation theorem (FDT) provides a means of calculating the response of a dynamical system to a small force by constructing a linear operator that depends only on data from the internal variability of the unperturbed system. Here the FDT is used to estimate the response of a two-layer quasigeostrophic model to two zonally symmetric torques, both barotropic, with the same sign of the forcing in the two layers, and baroclinic, with opposite sign forcing in the two layers. The supercriticality of the model is also varied to test how the FDT fares, as this parameter is varied. To perform the FDT calculations the data are decomposed onto empirical orthogonal functions (EOFs) and only those EOFs that are well resolved are retained in the FDT calculations. In the barotropic case good qualitative estimates are obtained for all values of the supercriticality, though the FDT consistently overestimates the response, perhaps because of significant non-Gaussian behavior present in the model. Nevertheless, this adds to the evidence that the annular-mode time scale plays an important role in determining the response of the midlatitudes to small perturbations. The baroclinic case is more challenging for the FDT. However, by constructing different bases with which to calculate the EOFs, it is shown that the issue in this case is that the baroclinic variability is poorly sampled, not that the FDT fails. The strategies developed in order to generate these estimates may be applicable to situations in which the FDT is applied to larger systems.

Corresponding author address: Nicholas Lutsko, Program in Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, Princeton University, 300 Forrestal Rd., Princeton, NJ 08540. E-mail: lutsko@princeton.edu
Save