Ocean Dynamics

, Volume 64, Issue 5, pp 655–665 | Cite as

Time-calibrated estimates of oceanographic profiles using empirical orthogonal functions and clustering

Article
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Topical Collection on the 5th International Workshop on Modelling the Ocean (IWMO) in Bergen, Norway 17-20 June 2013

Abstract

Oceanographic climatology is widely used in different applications, such as climate studies, ocean model validation and planning of naval operations. Conventional climatological estimates are based on historic measurements, typically by averaging the measurements and thereby smoothing local phenomena. Such phenomena are often local in time and space, but crucial to some applications. Here, we propose a new method to estimate time-calibrated oceanographic profiles based on combined historic and real-time measurements. The real-time measurements may, for instance, be SAR pictures or autonomous underwater vehicles providing temperature values at a limited set of depths. The method employs empirical orthogonal functions and clustering on a training data set in order to divide the ocean into climatological regions. The real-time measurements are first used to determine what climatological region is most representative. Secondly, an improved estimate is determined using an optimisation approach that minimises the difference between the real-time measurements and the final estimate.

Keywords

Climatology Validation Empirical orthogonal functions Clustering 

References

  1. Bunkers MJ, JRM Jr, Degaetand AT (1996) Definition of climate regions in the Northern Plains using an objective cluster modification technique. J Clim 9:130–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Chen CT, Millero FJ (1977) Speed of sound in seawater at high pressures. J Acoust Soc Am 62:1129–1135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Finette S (2006) A stochastic representation of environmental uncertainty and its coupling to acoustic wave propagation in ocean waveguides. J Acoust Soc Am 120:2567–2579CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Fraley C, Raftery AE (1998) How many clusters? Which clustering method? Answers via model-based cluster analysis. The Computer Journal 41(8):578–588CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Guinehut S, Le Traon P, Larnicol G, Philipps S (2004) Combining ARGO and remote-sensing data to estimate the ocean three-dimensional temperature fields: a first approach based on simulated observations. J Marine Syst 46(1):85–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Guinehut S, Dhomps AL, Larnicol G, Le Traon PY (2012) High resolution 3-D temperature and salinity fields derived from in situ and satellite observations. Ocean Sci 8(5):845–857CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hjelmervik KT (2010) Inverting the water column sound speed. Presented at the ECUA conferenceGoogle Scholar
  8. Hjelmervik KT, Hjelmervik K (2013a) Estimating temperature and salinity profiles using empirical orthogonal functions and clustering on historical measurements. Ocean Dyn 6:809–821CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hjelmervik KT, Hjelmervik K (2013b) Improved estimation of oceanographic climatology using empirical orthogonal functions and clustering. In: IEEE conference publicationGoogle Scholar
  10. Hjelmervik KT, Jensen JK, Østenstad P, Ommundsen A (2012) Classification of acoustically stable areas using empirical orthogonal functions. Ocean Dyn 62:253–264. doi:10.1007/s10236-011-0499-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Jensen FB, Kuperman WA, Porter MB, Schmidt H (2000) Computational ocean acoustics. Springer, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  12. Jensen JK, Hjelmervik KT, Østenstad P (2012) Finding acoustically stable areas through empirical orthogonal function (EOF) classification. J Oceanic Engineering IEEE 37(1):103–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Klemas V (2011) Remote sensing of coastal plumes and ocean fronts: overview and case study. J Coastal Research 28(1A):1–7Google Scholar
  14. Larnicol G, Guinehut S, Rio M, Drevillon M, Faugere Y, Nicolas G (2006) The global observed ocean products of the french mercator project. In: Proceedings of 15 years of progress in radar altimetry symposium,vol 614 ESA special publicationGoogle Scholar
  15. LePage K (2006) Modeling propagation and reverberation sensitivity to oceanographic and seabed variability. IEEE J Oceanic Eng 31:402–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Levitus S (ed) (2010a) World ocean atlas 2009. Vol 1: temperature. U.S. Government Printing Office, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  17. Levitus S (ed) (2010b) World ocean atlas 2009. Vol 2: salinity. U.S. Government Printing Office, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  18. Preisendorfer RW (1988) Principal component analysis in meteoro logy and oceanography. Elsevier, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. Press WH, Teukolsky SA, Vetterling WT, Flannery BP (2007) Numerical recipies, 3rd edn. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  20. Thacker W, Sindlinger L (2007) Estimating salinity to complement observed temperature: 2. Northwestern Atlantic. J Marine Syst 65(1):249–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ullman DS, Cornillon PC (1999) Satellite-derived sea surface temperature fronts on the continental shelf off the Northeast US Coast. J Geophys Res: Oceans (1978–2012) 104(C10):23459–23478CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Vestfold University CollegeTønsbergNorway
  2. 2.Norwegian Defence Research Establishment (FFI)KjellerNorway

Personalised recommendations