Modelling and Observations: The use of Diagnostics

  • David G. Andrews
Part of the NATO ASI Series book series (ASIC, volume 321)

Abstract

This paper discusses some of the uses and limitations of dynamical diagnostics in the study of atmospheric models and observational data, and in the intercomparison of the two. Some of the problems of interpreting diagnostics are mentioned, with particular attention to the difficulties of extracting causal information. The need for controlled experiments with models for the latter purpose is stressed.

Keywords

Planetary Wave Middle Atmosphere Baroclinic Instability Stratospheric Sudden Warming Antarctic Ozone 
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. Andrews, D.G., Holton, J.R. and Leovy, C.B. (1987). Middle Atmosphere Dynamics. Academic Press, Orlando, Florida.Google Scholar
  2. Andrews, D.G., Mahlman, J.D. and Sinclair, R.W. (1983). Eliassen-Palm diagnostics of wave, mean-flow interaction in the GFDL “SKYHI” general circulation model. J. Atmos. Sci., 40, 2768–2784.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Edmon, H.J., Jr., Hoskins, B.J. and McIntyre, M.E. (1980). Eliassen-Palm cross sections for the troposphere. J. Atmos. Sci., 37, 2600–2616. (Also Corrigendum, 1981, J. Atmos. Sci., 38, 1115.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Hall, M.C.G. (1986). Application of adjoint sensitivity theory to an atmospheric general circulation model. J. Atmos. Sci., 43, 2644–2651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Haynes, P.H. (1988). Forced, dissipative generalizations of finite-amplitude wave-activity conservation relations for zonal and nonzonal basic flows. J. Atmos. Sci., 45, 2352–2362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hoskins, B.J. (1983a). Dynamical processes in the atmosphere and the use of models. Quart. J. Roy. Met. Soc., 109, 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hoskins, B.J. (1983b). Modelling of the transient eddies and their feedback on the mean flow. In Large-scale dynamical processes in the atmosphere, (eds. B.J. Hoskins and R.P. Pearce), pp. 169–199, Academic Press, Orlando, Florida.Google Scholar
  8. Lorenc, A.C. (1986). Analysis methods for numerical weather prediction. Quart. J. Roy. Met. Soc., 112, 1177–1194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Lorenz, E.N. (1967). The nature and theory of the general circulation of the atmosphere. World Meteorological Organization, Geneva.Google Scholar
  10. McIntyre, M.E. (1982). How well do we understand the dynamics of stratospheric sudden warmings? J. Meteor. Soc. Japan, 60, 37–65.Google Scholar
  11. McIntyre, M.E. (1988). Numerical weather prediction: a vision of the future. Weather, 43, 294–298.Google Scholar
  12. McIntyre, M.E. (1989). On the Antarctic Ozone Hole. J. Atmos. Terrest. Phys., 51, 29–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Palmer, T.N. and Mansfield, D.A. (1986). A study of wintertime circulation anomalies during past El Niño events, using a high resolution general circulation model. I: Influence of model climatology. Quart. J. Roy. Met. Soc., 112, 613–638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Plumb, R.A. (1983). A new look at the energy cycle. J. Atmos. Sci., 40, 1669–1688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Schlesinger, M.E. and Mitchell, J.F.B. (1987). Climate model simulations of the equilibrium response to increased carbon dioxide. Revs. Geophys., 25, 760–798.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • David G. Andrews
    • 1
  1. 1.Meteorological Office UnitHooke Institute Clarendon LaboratoryOxfordUK

Personalised recommendations