brian mapes mpo seminar september 26, 2012
DESCRIPTION
Zonal mean vertical mean momentum a data analysis and experimental prediction exercise motivated by impacts (work in progress). Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012. Outline. Motivation: impacts on our latitude (25N) Background: an old planetary physics problem - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Zonal mean vertical mean momentuma data analysis
and experimental prediction exercisemotivated by impacts
(work in progress)
Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012
![Page 2: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Outline• Motivation: impacts on our latitude (25N)• Background: – an old planetary physics problem– meaningful vs. arbitrary averaging
• Time series at one latitude• A full latitude-time analysis– climatology– anomalies and their budgets
• Statistical prediction of anomalies by LIM• Conclusions
![Page 3: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
iBTracs data
Barotropic zonal mean flow and TCsHigh-Low tercile <[u]>20-30°N composite (ASO)
![Page 4: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
H500 H
![Page 5: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Zonal mean "pushes" the subtropical highs(by exerting a PV tendency)
Heating(PV source)
Eddy Z1000
no [u]
Eddy Z1000
w/ July [u]
Chen, Hoerling & Dole 2001
![Page 6: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
High-Low tercile <[u]>20-30°N composite (ASO)
Barotropic zonal mean flow and TCs
![Page 7: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Outline• Motivation: impacts on our latitude (25N)• Background: – an old planetary physics problem– meaningful vs. arbitrary averaging
• Time series at one latitude• A full latitude-time analysis– climatology– anomalies and their budgets
• Statistical prediction of anomalies by LIM• Conclusions
![Page 8: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
![Page 9: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Basic u equation
• use x,y instead of lon,lat for clarity• phyd coordinate in vertical (no r clutter)• "usual approximations" (no f*w)
PGF Cor Convergence of 3D flux
(by both fluid and molecular motions)
![Page 10: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Break flux into components• and group d/dx terms:
• Zonal average on a phyd surface is []:
"mountain torque"
p surface L H L H
![Page 11: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Mass-weighted vertical average <>
• These 4 (+1) terms must add up (physics)...• But in data (reanalysis-estimated budgets)
there is a 6th (implied) term: "residual"
mtn torque transport(meridionally
across latitude lines)
TENDENCY = + + Friction
Net Coriolis+
it is small
![Page 12: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
"Meaningful" averaging and <[u]>• The averaged quantity <[u]> obeys an equation w/
fewer, smaller, & simpler terms than u• It is thus "harder to change" than local u, so it has
an existence (and, we will see, a persisence) that is arguably more substantial than u
• This is quite unlike many averages of many quantities that we sum up in our computers!
» many are just fictions or conveniences» to blend (but dilute) information or signals, or reduce "noise"
• I'll speak of <[u]> as a wind that "advects" scalars
![Page 13: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
<[u]>, GLobal AAM and length of day• Velocity * lever arm *circumference of lat line– GLAAM = <[u]> (a cos(f)) (2p a cos(f))
• GLAAM exchanged w/ solid Earth (conserved) measurable length of day fluctuations
» semiannual, ENSO, MJO
• (much <[u]> lit. as AAM)
![Page 14: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Zonal mean vs. “Annular modes”• NAM or “Arctic Oscillation” are EOFs of SLP– Related to NAO = pAzores-pIceland
• decomposition debate: semantic? profound?– NAM/SAM are patterns w/ max SLP’2 (variance)
• averaged over polar cap surface area– Some link to <[u]> via geostrophy, but loose
• Example of arbitrary vs. meaningful averaging– SLP’2 does not obey a physics equation that area-
averaging interestingly refines– If we end up calling it ‘annular’, why not use annuli? []
![Page 15: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Outline• Motivation: impacts on our latitude (25N)• Background: – an old planetary physics problem– meaningful vs. arbitrary averaging
• Global picture Time series at 25N• A full latitude-time analysis– climatology– anomalies and their budgets
• Statistical prediction of anomalies by LIM• Conclusions
![Page 16: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Data used
• NCEP-NCAR Reanalysis ("NCEP1")• 1980-2011 (32 years)
• 94 equally spaced latitudes (~2o, "Gaussian")
• Courtesy Dr. Klaus Weickman (NOAA PSD) who computed the zonal means and budget terms– for his papers over ~20 years
• in spherical, sigma coordinates rather than p
• (MERRA used for some climatology figs)
![Page 17: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
textbook: 4 jets, with meanders
![Page 18: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
u200 annual mean [u200] ann cyc
Jan -------------------------- Dec
<[u]>
![Page 19: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
climatology of <[u]>
NCEP1 sigma 1-21MERRA 1000-100 mb NCEP1 all levels
45
45
All Scales: +/- 25 m/s
Annual mean map MERRA1000-100 mb
30
30
![Page 20: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
u 50 mb annual mean and cycle
![Page 21: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Outline• Motivation: impacts on our latitude (26N)• Background: – an old planetary physics problem– meaningless vs. meaningful averaging
• Time series at our latitude (26N)• A full latitude-time analysis– climatology– anomalies and their budgets
• Statistical prediction of anomalies by LIM• Conclusions
![Page 22: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
<[u]> at 26N
![Page 23: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
data => mean clim(doy) + anomaly(doy,y)
color = year (blue red rainbow)
![Page 24: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
data => mean clim(doy) + anomaly(doy,y)
![Page 25: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
data => mean clim(doy) + anomaly(poy,y)
![Page 26: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Quantify seasonality: RMS (or stdev)
Winter has bigger anomalies on average than summeranomalies are strongly persistent from day to day
– (5-day data pre-averaging doesn’t reduce their square very much)» (the heavy line)
?
![Page 27: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Winter anomalies are bigger• Midwinter (ground hog day) minimum?
![Page 28: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Winter anomalies are bigger• Midwinter (ground hog day) minimum?
![Page 29: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Quantify longevity of anomaliesby lagged multiplication
![Page 30: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Quantify longevity by lagged multiplication
1980
mean of all years
1983
![Page 31: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Quantify longevity by lagged multiplication
Mean of all M
arch 1s
mean of all March days'
means over all years
Repeat for all 30 days in March
Mean of all March 31s
![Page 32: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Quantify longevity by lagged multiplication
Jan
mean of all months
Repeat for all months of the year
Feb
Mar
DecSummer
Magnitude difference is distracting. We already quantified that winter anomalies are larger: the lag-0 variance. So divideby that to normalize.
(this is "auto-covariance")
![Page 33: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Quantify longevity by lagged multiplication Repeat for all months of the year
Jan
mean acov of all months
Feb
Mar
DecSummer
Jan
Feb
Mar
Dec
Apr
mean acov of all months
normalized by its
lag=0 value May
![Page 34: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Repeat for all months of the year
Jan
Feb
Mar
Dec
Apr
IDEA: is it exponential decay C=C0 exp(-t/15d)?
...a postulated reinterpretation of:
characteristiclifetime (2/a)
~25 dMayJJA
Nov
Oct
Sep
... a solution of this ... (univariate)
?both
![Page 35: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
data => mean clim(doy) + anomaly(doy,y)
![Page 36: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
Power = | FT(autocov) |2
broad hump @ "wave period"
~2 characteristic times (50d)
1 2Period (months)
![Page 37: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
Histogram of 26N <[u]> anomalies
INCONSISTENT w/ this univariate model, at least w/Gaussian, white noise (Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process)
![Page 38: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
![Page 39: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
Outline
• Background: an old planetary physics problem• Motivation: impacts on our latitude• Our time series (26N)• A full latitude-time analysis– climatology– anomalies
• Statistical prediction of anomalies by LIM• Outstanding questions
![Page 40: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
climatology of <[u]>
NCEP1 sigma 1-21MERRA 1000-100 mb NCEP1 all levels
45
45
All Scales: +/- 25 m/s
Annual mean map MERRA1000-100 mb
30
30
![Page 41: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
Real time monitoring (Klaus Weickmann)
http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/map/clim/aam.rean.shtml
JAN MAYSEP
2011 2012
25N
![Page 42: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
Characterize timescale w/autocorr.
![Page 43: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
autocov(lag,lat) = autocorr(lag,lat)*stdev2(lat)
![Page 44: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
autocov(lag,lat) = autocorr(lag,lat)*stdev2(lat)
![Page 45: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
<[u]> anomalies are more persistenton edges of jets
MERRA 1000-100 mb
Jan Dec
45
45
Annual mean map
![Page 46: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
Timescale: extend this to lag x lat
1980
mean of all years
1983
![Page 47: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
*apply with negtive weight*apply withpos. weight
etc. etc. for 32 years (optionally for seasons) and sum it all up
Composite anomalies in lag x latweighted by 26N base time series
![Page 48: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
This weighted composite is an array of regression coefficients
(slopes of linear fits onbase(t) vs. field(t+lag,lat)
scatterplots at each altitude)
same, along base lat...All seasons:
"Characteristic" time scales AND latitude evolution
![Page 49: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
Can do the same for tendency field, and torques
m/s
composite of d/dt = d/dt(composite)
![Page 50: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/50.jpg)
Budget(composite over anomalies in all
seasons)
TEND = MTN + TRANSPORT + (FRICTION+GW) + CORIOLIS + RESIDUAL
TEND
MTN
TRANSPORT(FRICTION)
RESIDUAL
![Page 51: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/51.jpg)
Outline
• Background: an old planetary physics problem• Motivation: impacts on our latitude• Our time series (26N)• A full latitude-time analysis– climatology– anomalies
• Statistical prediction of anomalies by LIM• Outstanding questions
![Page 52: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/52.jpg)
Understand, schmunderstandCan we predict it?
• Statistical prediction by Linear Inverse Modeling (LIM)• Predicting <[u]> from itself only– ENSO signals etc. are already in <[u]>
• precisely to the extent that they affect it!» but mutiple signals are separately predictable only if they have
distinct spatial structure, not by time scale per se...
• IDEA: Using 32 years of observed time evolution, estimate the linear matrix B in this eqn:
![Page 53: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/53.jpg)
Understand, schmunderstandCan we predict it?
• The vector of <[u]> at all latitudes is the x in:
• The expectation solution (...if ‘noise’ averages to nothing,
in an ensemble mean, which is what we’d want as a forecast...) is: » x(t) = exp(Bt) x(initial)
where t is the forecast lead
![Page 54: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/54.jpg)
Understand, schmunderstandCan we predict it?
• In the univariate case, we fit such an exp(at) form based on a dx/dt = -ax + noise model.
• There we estimated a from: • cov(t) = exp(-at) cov(0) so a = ln( cov(t)/cov(0) )/t
![Page 55: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/55.jpg)
Understand, schmunderstandCan we predict it?
• The multivariate version is the same– except that “matrix division” is on the left
» in a Matlab syntax I admire:
• univariate: a = ln( cov(t)/cov(0) )/t•multivariate: B = ln( cov(0)\cov(t) )/t• Really: B = ln( [cov(0)]-1 cov(t) )/t
![Page 56: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/56.jpg)
Covariance of x with x
Eq. anoms
are broad
Midlat anoms
are flanked by
opposite values
![Page 57: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/57.jpg)
Covariance of x with x
Note the diagonal is something weve seen before..
![Page 58: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/58.jpg)
Covariance of x with (x, t days later)
25 N&S lobes hardly weaken w/ lag
asymmetric(poleward
prop.)
symmetric by construction: Not:
0d 5d 10d
15d 20d
![Page 59: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/59.jpg)
B and cov(0)\cov(t) are inscrutable • But this is efficient, precise “information plumbing”• We know B’s character by its action:– x(t) = exp(Bt) x(initial)
1. Make this hindcast for all t, for every day in the record2. Use it to define the “noise”
– discrete version, daily
3. Make white noise by randomly re-sampling that in time4. Use randomized noise in the forward eq syn. data:
![Page 60: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/60.jpg)
Use B and randomized noise to make syn. data:
• B knows about typical structure and timescale, as a function of latitude, including latitudinal drifts, width dependence of an anomaly's longevity, etc.
Which is real data?
![Page 61: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/61.jpg)
LIM expected (or ensemble) hindcast using (no noise)
from initial spatial structure alone
![Page 62: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/62.jpg)
LIM hindcasts: skill eval
• (Work in progress...)
• Make a summer B and a winter B? – each fitted from ½ as much data...• but the seasons may be different enough to justify 2?
• Why not a different B for every day (using a season centered around that day)? It’s just matrix calculations done once – cheap.
![Page 63: Brian Mapes MPO seminar September 26, 2012](https://reader035.vdocuments.site/reader035/viewer/2022062501/568162e0550346895dd366cc/html5/thumbnails/63.jpg)
Conclusions• <[u]> correlated with TC recurvature longitude
• hyp: via "pushing" the subtropical high E/W
• <[u]> is a "meaningful" average – obeys a budget with fewer terms• It is "hard to change"
– & thus arguably has a solid "existence" (or at least persistence)
• Earth has 5-7 belts with enhanced persistence• Long predictability may be possible– 10s of days...
• Residual is large in <[u]> budget– models may be challenged? – statistical prediction appealing?