Abstract
This study examines the time and regime dependencies of sensitive areas identified by the conditional nonlinear optimal perturbation (CNOP) method for forecasts of two typhoons. Typhoon Meari (2004) was weakly nonlinear and is herein referred to as the linear case, while Typhoon Matsa (2005) was strongly nonlinear and is herein referred to as the nonlinear case.
In the linear case, the sensitive areas identified for special forecast times when the initial time was fixed resembled those identified for other forecast times. Targeted observations deployed to improve a special time forecast would thus also benefit forecasts at other times. In the nonlinear case, the similarities among the sensitive areas identified for different forecast times were more limited. The deployment of targeted observations in the nonlinear case would therefore need to be adapted to achieve large improvements for different targeted forecasts. For both cases, the closer the forecast time, the higher the similarities of the sensitive areas.
When the forecast time was fixed, the sensitive areas in the linear case diverged continuously from the verification area as the forecast period lengthened, while those in the nonlinear case were always located around the initial cyclones. The deployment of targeted observations to improve a special forecast depends strongly on the time of deployment.
An examination of the efficiency gained by reducing initial errors within the identified sensitive areas confirmed these results. In general, the greatest improvement in a special time forecast was obtained by identifying the sensitive areas for the corresponding forecast time period.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ancell, B. C., and C. F. Mass, 2006: Structure, growth rates, and tangent linear accuracy of adjoint sensitivities with respect to horizontal and vertical resolution. Mon. Wea. Rev., 134, 2971–2988.
Bishop, C. H., and Z. Toth, 1999: Ensemble transformation and adaptive observations. J. Atmos. Sci., 56, 1748–1765.
Bishop, C. H., B. J. Etherton, and S. J. Majumdar, 2001: Adaptive sampling with the ensemble transform Kalman filter. Part I: Theoretical aspects. Mon. Wea. Rev., 129, 420–436.
Birgin, E. G., J. E. Martinez, and R. Marcos, 2001: Algorithm 813: SPG—Software for convex-constrained optimization. ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software, 27, 340–349.
Buizza, R., and A. Montani, 1999: Targeting observations using singular vectors. J. Atmos. Sci., 56, 2965–2985.
Buizza, R., C. Cardinali, G. Kelly, and J. Thépaut, 2007: The value of targeted observations. Part II: The value of observations taken in singular vectors-based target areas. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 133, 1817–1832.
Chen, B. Y., 2011: Observation system experiments for typhoon Nida (2004) using the CNOP method and DOTSTAR data. Atmos. Oceanic Sci. Lett., 4, 118–123.
Dudhia, J., 1993: A nonhydrostatic version of the Penn State/NCAR Mesoscale Model: Validation tests and simulation of an Atlantic cyclone and cold front. Mon. Wea. Rev., 121, 1493–1513.
Duan, W. S., and M. Mu, 2006: Investigating decadal variability of El Niño-Southern Oscillation asymmetry by conditional nonlinear optimal perturbation. J. Geophys. Res., 111, Co7015, doi: 10.1029/2005JC003458.
Duan, W. S., and R. Zhang, 2010: Is model parameter error related to a significant spring predictability barrier for El Niñno events? Results from a theoretical model. Adv. Atmos. Sci., 27(5), 1003–1013, doi: 10.1007/s00376-009-9166-4.
Ehrendorfer, M., and R. M. Errico, 1995: Mesoscale predictability and the spectrum of optimal perturbations. J. Atmos. Sci., 52, 3475–3500.
Hamill, T. M., and C. Snyder, 2002: Using improved background-error covariance from an ensemble Kalman filter for adaptive observations. Mon. Wea. Rev., 130, 1552–1572.
Kim, H. M., M. C. Morgan, and R. E. Morss, 2004: Evolution of analysis error and adjoint-based sensitivities: Implications for adaptive observations. J. Atmos. Sci., 61, 795–812.
Majumdar, S. J., S. D. Aberson, C. H. Bishop, R. Buizza, M. S. Peng, and C. A. Reynolds, 2006: A comparison of adaptive observing guidance for Atlantic tropical cyclones. Mon. Wea. Rev., 134, 2354–2372.
Mu, M., and W. S. Duan, 2003: A new approach to studying ENSO predictability: Conditional nonlinear optimal perturbation. Chinese Science Bulletin, 48, 747–749.
Mu, M., and Z. N. Jiang, 2008: A new method to generate the initial perturbations in ensemble forecast: conditional nonlinear optimal perturbations. Chinese Science Bulletin, 53, 2062–2068.
Mu, M., L. Sun, and D. A. Hank, 2004: The sensitivity and stability of the ocean’s thermohaline circulation to finite amplitude perturbations. J. Phys. Oceanogr., 34, 2305–2315.
Mu, M., H. L. Wang, and F. F. Zhou, 2007a: A preliminary application of Conditional Nonlinear Optimal Perturbation to adaptive observation. Chinese J. Atmos. Sci, 31, 1102–1112. (in Chinese)
Mu, M., H. Xu, and W. S. Duan, 2007b: A kind of initial errors related to “spring predictability barrier” for El Nino events in Zebiak-Cane model. Geophys. Res. Lett., doi: 10.1029/2006GL027412.
Mu, M., F. F. Zhou, and H. L. Wang, 2009: A method to identify the sensitive areas in targeting for tropical cyclone prediction: conditional nonlinear optimal perturbation. Mon. Wea. Rev., 137, 1623–1639.
Palmer, T. N., R. Gelaro, J. Barkmeijer, and R. Buizza, 1998: Singular vectors, metrics, and adaptive observations. J. Atmos. Sci., 55, 633–653.
Qin, X. H., and M. Mu, 2011a: A study on the reduction of forecast error variance by three adaptive observation approaches for tropical cyclone prediction. Mon. Wea. Rev., 139, 2218–2232.
Qin, X. H., and M. Mu, 2011b: Influence of conditional nonlinear optimal perturbations sensitivity on typhoon track forecasts. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., doi: 10.1002/qj.902.
Rivier, O., G. Lapeyre, and O. Talagrand, 2008: Nonlinear generalization of singular vectors: behavior in a baroclinic unstable flow. J. Atmos. Sci, 65, 1896–1911.
Sun, L., M. Mu, D. J. Sun, and X. Y. Yin, 2005: Passive mechanism of decadal variation of thermohaline circulation. J. Geophys. Res., 110, C07025, doi: 10.1029/2005JC002897.
Terwisscha van Scheltinga, A. D., and H. A. Dijkstra, 2008: Conditional nonlinear optimal perturbations of the double-gyre ocean circulation. Nonlinear Processes Geophysics, 15, 727–734.
Wu, C. C., J. H. Chen, P. H. Lin, and K. H. Chou, 2007: Targeted observations of tropical cyclone movement based on the adjoint-derived sensitivity steering vector. J. Atmos. Sci., 64, 2611–2626.
Yu, Y. S., W. S. Duan, H. Xu, and M. Mu, 2009: Dynamics of nonlinear error growth and seasondependent predictability of El Niño events in the Zebiak-Cane model. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 135, doi: 10.1002/qj.526.
Zhou, F. F., 2009: The application of conditional nonlinear optimal perturbation to the tropical cyclone targeted observations. Ph.D. dissertation, Institute of Atmospheric Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China, 126pp.
Zhou, F. F., and M. Mu, 2011: The impact of verification area design on tropical cyclone targeted observations based on the CNOP method. Adv. Atmos. Sci., 28(5), 997–1010, doi: 10.1007/s00376-011-0120-x.
Zhou, F. F., and M. Mu, 2012: The impact of horizontal resolution on the CNOP and on its identified sensitive areas for tropical cyclone predictions. Adv. Atmos. Sci., 29, 36–46, doi: 10.1007/s00376-011-1003-x.
Zou, X., F. Vandenberghe, M. Pondeca, and Y.-H. Kuo, 1997: Introduction to adjoint techniques and the MM5 adjoint modeling system. NCAR Tech. Note, NCAR/TN-435 STR, 107pp.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Zhou, F., Mu, M. The time and regime dependencies of sensitive areas for tropical cyclone prediction using the CNOP method. Adv. Atmos. Sci. 29, 705–716 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00376-012-1174-0
Received:
Revised:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00376-012-1174-0