Advertisement

Comparison of Ensemble-Based Filters for a Simple Model of Ocean Thermohaline Circulation

  • Sangil Kim
Chapter

Abstract

The performance of ensemble-based filters such as Sequential Importance Resampling (SIR) method, Ensemble Kalman Filter (EnKF), and Maximum Entropy Filter (MEF) are compared when applied to an idealized model of ocean thermohaline circulation. The model is a stochastic partial differential equation that exhibits bimodal states and rapid transitions between them. The optimal filtering result against which the methods are tested is obtained by using the SIR filter with N=104 for which the method converges. The numerical results reveal advantages and disadvantages of each ensemble-based filter. SIR obtains the optimal result, but requires a large sample size, N⩾ 103. EnKF achieves its best result with relatively small sample size N=102, but this best result may not be the optimal solution. MEF with N=102 achieves the optimal results and potentially is a better tool for systems that exhibit abrupt state transitions.

Keywords

Data Assimilation Ensemble Member Salinity Gradient Thermohaline Circulation Reference Distribution 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anderson JL (2007) An adaptive covariance inflation error correction algorithm for ensemble filters. Tellus 59A:210–224Google Scholar
  2. Arulampalam MS et al (2002) A tutorial on particle filters for online nonlinear/non-Gaussian bayesian tracking. IEEE Trans Signal Process 50(2):174–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bellman RE (1961) Adaptive control processes. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJGoogle Scholar
  4. Burgers G et al (1998) Analysis scheme in the ensemble Kalman filter. Mon Wea Rev 126:1719–1724CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Campillo F et al (1994) Algorithmes parallèles pour le filtrage non linèare et les èquations aux dèrivées partielles stochastiques. Bull Liaison Rech Info Auto 141:21–24Google Scholar
  6. Cessi P, Young WR (1992) Multiple equilibria in two-dimensional thermo-haline circulation. J Fluid Mech 241:291–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cover TM, Thomas JA (1991) Elements of information theory. John Wiley & Sons, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Daum F (2005) Nonlinear filters: Beyond the Kalman filter. IEEE AES Magazine 20(8):57–69Google Scholar
  9. Doucet A et al (2001) Sequential Monte Carlo in practice. Springer-Verlag, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. Evensen G (1994a) Inverse methods and data assimilation in nonlinear ocean models. Physica D 77:108–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Evensen G (1994b) Sequential data assimilation with a nonlinear quasigeostrophic model using Monte Carlo methods to forecast error statistics. J Geophys Res 99(C5):10143–10162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Evensen G (2003) The ensemble Kalman filter: Theoretical formulation and practical implementation. Ocean Dyn 53:343–367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Eyink GL (2005) Statistical hydrodynamics of the thermohaline circulation in a two-dimensional model. Tellus A 57:100–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Eyink GL, Kim S (2006) A maximum entropy method for particle filtering. J Stat Phys 123(5):1071–1128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Eyink GL et al (2004) A mean field approximation in data assimilation for nonlinear dynamics. Physica D 195:347–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gilks WR, Berzuini C (2001) Following a moving target – Monte Carlo inference for dynamics Bayesian models. J R Stat Soc Ser B Stat Methodol 63(1):127–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gordon N et al (1993) Novel approach to nonlinear/non-Gaussian Bayesian state estimation. IEE Proc Radar Signal Process 140:107–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hannachi A, Neil AO (2001) Atmospheric multiple Equilibria and non-Gaussian behaviour in model simulations. Q J R Atmos Sci 127:939–958Google Scholar
  19. Jaynes ET (2003) Probability theory: The logic of science. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  20. Jazwinski AH (1970) Stochastic processes and filtering theory. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. Kim S (2005) Ensemble filtering methods for nonlinear dynamics. Dissertation. University of ArizonaGoogle Scholar
  22. Kim S, Eyink GL (2008) Predicting rapid climate changes. In preparationGoogle Scholar
  23. Kim S et al (2003) Ensemble filtering for nonlinear dynamics. Mon Wea Rev 131:2586–2594CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kitagawa G, Gersch W (1996) Smoothness priors analysis of time series, volume 116 of Lecture Notes in Statistics. Springer-Verlag, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  25. Kushner HJ (1962) On the differential equations satisfied by conditional probability densities of Markov processes, with applications. J SIAM Control Ser A 2:106–119Google Scholar
  26. Kushner HJ (1967) Approximation to optimal nonlinear filters. IEEE Trans Auto Contr 12:546–556CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Van Leeuwen PJ (2003) A variance-minimizing filter for large-scale application. Mon Wea Rev 131:2071–2084CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lorenc QC, Hammon O (1988) Objective quality control of observations using Bayesian methods. Theory, and a practical implementation. Q J R Meteorol Soc 114:515–543CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lorenz EN (1963) Deterministic nonperiodic flow. J Atmos Sci 20:130–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mead L, Papanicolaou N (1984) Maximum entropy in the problem of moments. J Math Phys 25:2404–2417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Miller RN et al (1994) Advanced data assimilation in strongly nonlinear dynamical systems. J Atmos Sci 51:1037–1056CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Miller RN et al. (1999) Data assimilation into nonlinear stochastic models. Tellus 51A:167–194Google Scholar
  33. Del Moral P (1996) Nonlinear filtering: Interacting particle solution. Markov Proc Rel Fields 2:555–579Google Scholar
  34. Namias J (1950) The index cycle and its role in the general circulation. J Meteorl 7:130–139Google Scholar
  35. Rahmstorf S (1995) Bifurcation of the Atlantic thermohaline circulation in response to changes in the hydrological cycle. Nature 378:145–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rahmstorf S (2003) The thermohaline circulation: The current climate. Nature 421:699CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rex D (1950) Blocking action in the middle troposphere and its effect upon regional climate. Tellus 2:196–211Google Scholar
  38. Smyth P et al (1999) Multiple regimes in northern hemisphere height fields via mixture model clustering. J Atmos Sci 56:3704–3723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Stommel H (1961) Thermohaline convection with two stable regimes of flow. Tellus 13:224–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Stratonovich RL (1960) Conditional Markov processes. Theor Prob Appl 5:156–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Thual O, McWilliams JC (1992) The catastrophe structure of thermohaline convection in a two dimensional fluid model and a comparison with low-order box model. Geophys Astrophys Fluid Dyn 64:67–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wand MP, Jones MC (1995) Kernel smoothing. Chapman and Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sangil Kim
    • 1
  1. 1.The College of Oceanic and Atmospheric SciencesOregon State UniversityCorvallisUSA

Personalised recommendations