Theoretical and Applied Climatology

, Volume 132, Issue 1–2, pp 301–311 | Cite as

The application of low-rank and sparse decomposition method in the field of climatology

Original Paper
  • 134 Downloads

Abstract

The present study reports a low-rank and sparse decomposition method that separates the mean and the variability of a climate data field. Until now, the application of this technique was limited only in areas such as image processing, web data ranking, and bioinformatics data analysis. In climate science, this method exactly separates the original data into a set of low-rank and sparse components, wherein the low-rank components depict the linearly correlated dataset (expected or mean behavior), and the sparse component represents the variation or perturbation in the dataset from its mean behavior. The study attempts to verify the efficacy of this proposed technique in the field of climatology with two examples of real world. The first example attempts this technique on the maximum wind-speed (MWS) data for the Indian Ocean (IO) region. The study brings to light a decadal reversal pattern in the MWS for the North Indian Ocean (NIO) during the months of June, July, and August (JJA). The second example deals with the sea surface temperature (SST) data for the Bay of Bengal region that exhibits a distinct pattern in the sparse component. The study highlights the importance of the proposed technique used for interpretation and visualization of climate data.

Keywords

Low-rank and sparse decomposition Climate system Climate signal Wind speed Sea surface temperature Climate indices Indian Ocean 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors express their sincere gratitude to Dr. Swadhin Behera, Group Leader, Climate Variability Prediction and Application Research Group, Application Laboratory, JAMSTEC, Japan for sharing the IODS index values used in the present study.

References

  1. Balmseda MA, Mogensen K, Weaver AT (2013) Evaluation of the ECMWF ocean reanalysis system ORAS4. Q J R Meteorol Soc 139:1132–1161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bertsekas DP (1999) Nonlinear programming: 2nd edition, Athena Scientific pp. 780.Google Scholar
  3. Borak JS, Jasinski MF (2009) Effective interpolation of incomplete satellite-derived leaf-area index time series for the continental United States. Agric For Meteorol 149:320–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cipollini P, Cromwell D, Quartly GD (1999) Observations of Rossby wave propagation in the Northeast Atlantic with TOPEX/POSEIDON altimetry. Adv Space Res 22(11):1553–1556CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Emmanuel C, Li X, Ma Y, Wright J (2011) Robust principal component analysis. Journal of the ACM 58(3)Google Scholar
  6. Guo H, Xu M, Hu Q (2011). Changes in near-surface wind speed in China: 1969-2005. Int J Climatol 31:349–358. doi: 10.1002/joc.2091
  7. Kang S, Running SW, Zhao M, Kimball JS, Glassy J (2005) Improving continuity of MODIS terrestrial photosynthesis products using an interpolation scheme for cloudy pixels. Int J Remote Sens 26:1659–1676CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kwon MH, Jhun J-G, Ha K-J (2007) Decadal change in east Asian summer monsoon circulation in the mid-1990s. Geophys Res Lett 34(21). doi: 10.1029/2007GL031977
  9. Lanzante JR (1996) Lag relationships involving tropical sea surface temperatures. J Clim 9:2568–2578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Liang X, Ren X, Zhang Z, Ma Y (2012) Repairing sparse low-rank texture. Computer vision-ECCV 2012, vol. 7576 of the series Lecture Notes in Computer Science 482–495Google Scholar
  11. Liu G, Lin A, Yan S, Sun J, Yu Y, Ma Y (2013) Robust recovery of subspace structures by low-rank representation. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 34(1):171–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ma Yi, (2012) Pursuit of low-dimensional structures in high-dimensional data. Invited talk Session-I, TuAT1, IEEE.Google Scholar
  13. Mobahi H, Zhou Z, Yang AY, Ma Y (2011) Holistic 3D reconstruction of urban structures from low-rank textures. IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision Workshops. ICCV 2011 Workshops, Barcelona, Spain, November 6–13, 2011Google Scholar
  14. Peng Y, Ganesh A, Wright J, Xu W, Ma Y (2012) RASL: robust alignment by sparse and low-rank decomposition for linearly correlated images. IEEE Trans Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence 34(11):2233–2246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Peterson TC, Manton MJ (2008) Monitoring changes in climate extremes: a tale of international collaboration. Bulletin of American Meteorological Society 89:1266–1271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Pirazzoli PA, Tomasin A (2003) Recent near-surface wind changes in the Central Mediterranean and Adriatic areas. Int J Climatol 23:963–973CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Poggio L, Gimona A, Brown I (2012) Spatio-temporal MODIS EVI gap filling under cloud cover: an example in Scotland. ISPRS J Photogramm Remote Sens 72:56–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Pryor SC, Barthelmie RJ, Riley ES (2007) Historical evolution of wind climates in the USA. Jour Phys Conf Ser 75:012065. doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/75/1/012065 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Queffeulou P, Croize-Fillon D (2013). Global altimeter SWH data set, version 10, May 2013, Laboratoire d’Oceanographie Spatiale, IFREMER, BP 70, 29280 Plouzane, France. ftp://ftp.ifremer.fr/ifremer/cersat/products/swath/altimeters/waves/documentation
  20. Saji NH, Yamagata T (2003) Possible impacts of Indian Ocean dipole mode events on global climate. Clim Res 25:151–169Google Scholar
  21. Saji NH, Goswami BN, Vinayachandran PN, Yamagata T (1999) A dipole mode in the tropical Indian Ocean. Nature 401:360–363Google Scholar
  22. Seneviratne SI, et al. (2012) Changes in climate extremes and their impacts on the natural physical environment. Managing the risks of extreme events and disasters to advance climate change adaptation, C. B. Field et al. (Eds.), Cambridge University Press, 109–230Google Scholar
  23. Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt K et al (2007) Climate change 2007: the physical science basis. Contributions of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  24. Torrence C, Compo GP (1998) A practical guide to wavelet analysis. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 79:61–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Wan H, Wang LX, Swail VR (2010) Homogenization and trend analysis of Canadian near-surface wind speeds. J Clim 23:1209–1225. doi: 10.1175/2009JCLI3200.1
  26. Wright J, Ganesh A, Rao S, Ma Y (2009) Robust principal component analysis: exact recovery of corrupted low-rank matrices via convex optimization. Proc. of the 23rd Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, Vancouver, BC, Canada. pp 2080–2088Google Scholar
  27. Yamagata T, Behera SK, Luo JJ, Masson S, Jury M, Rao SA (2004) Coupled ocean atmosphere variability in the tropical Indian Ocean. Earth climate: the ocean-atmosphere interaction, geophys monogr, vol 147. Amer Geophys Union 189–212Google Scholar
  28. Yang S, Webster PJ, Dong M (1992) Longitudinal heating gradient: another possible factor influencing the intensity of the Asian summer monsoon circulation. Adv Atmos Sci 9:397–410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Yu L, Rienecker MM (1998) Evidence of an extra-tropical atmospheric influence during the onset of the 1997–98 El Nino. Geophys Res Lett 25:3537–3540Google Scholar
  30. Yu L, Rienecker MM (1999) Mechanisms for the Indian Ocean warming during the 1997–98 El Nino. Geophys Res Lett 26:735–738. doi: 10.1029/1999GL900072
  31. Zhang Z, Liang X, Ma Y (2011) Camera calibration with lens distortion from low-rank textures. IEEE Intl. Conf. on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 1347–1354Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Wien 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Ocean Engineering and Naval ArchitectureIndian Institute of Technology KharagpurKharagpurIndia

Personalised recommendations