The Tangent-Linear and Adjoint Models of the NEPTUNE Dynamical Core

Edward D. Zaron; Boon S. Chua; P. Alex Reinecke; John Michalakes; James D. Doyle; Liang Xu

doi:10.16993/tellusa.146

The Tangent-Linear and Adjoint Models of the NEPTUNE Dynamical Core

Tellus

Volume 74 (2022): Issue 1

By: Edward D. Zaron , Boon S. Chua, P. Alex Reinecke, John Michalakes , James D. Doyle and Liang Xu

Open Access

|Nov 2022

Abstract

An approximate tangent-linear model and its adjoint have been developed for the dynamical core of the NEPTUNE model (Navy Environmental Prediction sysTem Utilizing a Nonhydrostatic Engine). NEPTUNE is a spectral element solver for the compressible, nonhydrostatic, deep atmosphere equations of motion on a cubed sphere grid. The tangent-linear model (TLM) and adjoint model (ADJ) were developed to enable 4D-Var-based forecast initialization systems for NEPTUNE by interfacing with driver software, such as JEDI (Joint Effort for Data assimilation Integration), but they are also useful tools for studies of linear instability and forecast sensitivity. Jablonowski and Williamson’s baroclinic wave test is used to illustrate the accuracy and characteristics of the TLM and ADJ for sensitivity studies and variational assimilation.

References

Amerault, C, Zou, X and Doyle, J. 2008. Tests of an adjoint mesoscale model with explicit moist physics on the cloud scale. Mon. Wea. Rev., 136: 2120–2132. DOI: 10.1175/2007MWR2259.1
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Ascher, UM, Ruuth, SJ and Spiteri, RJ. 1997. Implicit-explicit runge-kutta methods for time-dependent partial differential equations. Appl. Numer. Math., 25(2–3): 151–167. DOI: 10.1016/S0168-9274(97)00056-1
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Courtier, P, Derber, J, Errico, R, Louis, J-F and Vukicevic, T. 1993. Important literature on the use of adjoint, variational methods and the Kalman filter in meteorology. Tellus, 45A: 342–357. DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-0870.1993.t01-4-00002.x
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Courtier, P, Thepaut, J-N and Hollingsworth, A. 1994. A strategy for operational implementation of 4D-Var, using an incremental approach. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 120: 1367–1387. DOI: 10.1002/qj.49712051912
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Doyle, J, Reinecke, A, Viner, K, Flagg, D, Gabersek, S, King, S, Martini, M, Michalakes, J, Ryglicki, D and Giraldo, F. 2018. The Navy’s next-generation NEPTUNE modeling system. Paper 344413. AMS 25th Conference on Numerical Weather Prediction. URL https://ams.confex.com/ams/29WAF25NWP/webprogram/Paper344413.html.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Doyle, J, Reynolds, CA and Amerault, C. 2019. Adjoint sensitivity analysis of high-impact extratropical cyclones. Mon. Wea. Rev., 147(12): 4511–4532. DOI: 10.1175/MWR-D-19-0055.1
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Errico, RM. 1997. What is an adjoint model? Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 78(11): 2577–2591. DOI: 10.1175/1520-0477(1997)078<;2577:WIAAM>2.0.CO;2
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Firl, G, Carson, L, Bernardet, L, Heinzeller, D and Harrold, M. 2021. Common Community Physics Package single column model v5.0.0 user and technical guide. URL https://dtcenter.org/GMTB/v5.0.0/scm-ccpp-guide-v5.0.0.pdf.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Gardner, DJ, Guerra, JE, Hamon, FP, Reynolds, DR, Ullrich, PA and Carol, S. 2018. Woodward. Implicit–explicit (IMEX) Runge-Kutta methods for nonhydrostatic atmospheric models. Geosci. Model Dev., 11: 1497–1515. DOI: 10.5194/gmd-11-1497-2018
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Giering, R and Kaminski, T. 1998. Recipes for adjoint code construction. ACM Trans. Math. Software, 24: 437–474. DOI: 10.1145/293686.293695
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Giraldo, FX, Hesthaven, JS and Warburton, T. 2002. Nodal high-order discontinuous Galerkin methods for the spherical shallow water equations. J. Com. Phys., 181: 499–525. DOI: 10.1006/jcph.2002.7139
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Giraldo, FX, Kelly, JF and Constantinescu, EM. 2013. Implicit-explicit formulations for a 3D nonhydrostatic unified model of the atmosphere (NUMA). SIAM J. Sci. Comp., 35(5): B1162–B1194. DOI: 10.1137/120876034
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Giraldo, FX, Restelli, M and Lauter, M. 2010. Semi-implicit formulations of the Navier–Stokes equations: Application to nonhydrostatic atmospheric modeling. SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 32(6): 3394–3425. DOI: 10.1137/090775889
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Giraldo, FX and Rosmond, TE. 2004. A scalable spectral element Eulerian atmospheric model (SEE-AM) for NWP: Dynamical core tests. Mon. Wea. Rev., 132(1): 133–153. DOI: 10.1175/1520-0493(2004)132<;0133:ASSEEA>2.0.CO;2
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Hogan, TF, Liu, M, Ridout, JA, Peng, MS, Whitcomb, TR, Ruston, BC, Reynolds, CA, Eckermann, SD, Moskaitis, JR, Baker, NL, McCormack, JP, Viner, KC, McLay, JG, Flatau, MK, Xu, L, Chen, C and Chang, SW. 2014. The Navy Global Environmental Model. Oceanography, 27(3): 116–125. DOI: 10.5670/oceanog.2014.73
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Holdaway, D, Kim, JG, Lin, S-J, Errico, R, Gelaro, R, Kent, J, Coy, L, Doyle, J and Goldstein, A. 2017. Development and applications of the FV3 GEOS-5 adjoint modeling system. Report number GSFC-E-DAA-TN42822.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Jablonowski, C and Williamson, DL. 2006. A baroclinic instability test case for atmospheric model dynamical cores. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 132: 2943–2975. DOI: 10.1256/qj.06.12
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Kelly, JF and Giraldo, FX. 2012. Continuous and discontinuous Galerkin methods for a scalable 3D nonhydrostatic atmospheric model: limited-area mode. J. Comp. Phys., 231: 7988–8008. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcp.2012.04.042
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Kopera, MA and Giraldo, FX. 2015. Mass conservation of the unified continuous and discontinuous element-based Galerkin methods on dynamically adaptive grids with application to atmospheric simulations. J. Com. Phys., 297: 90–103. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcp.2015.05.010
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Langland, RH and Baker, N. 2004. Estimation of observation impact using the NRL atmospheric variational data assimilation adjoint system. Tellus, 56A: 189–201. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0870.2004.00056.x
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Levin, JC, Haidvogel, DB, Chua, B, Bennett, AF and Iskandarani, M. 2006. Euler–Lagrange equations for the spectral element shallow water system. Ocean Mod., 12: 348–377. DOI: 10.1016/j.ocemod.2005.06.002
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Luchini, P and Bottaro, A. 2014. Adjoint equations in stability analysis. Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics, 46(1): 493–517. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-fluid-010313-141253
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Mahfouf, J-F. 1999. Influence of physical processes on the tangent-linear approximation. Tellus, 51A: 147–166. DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-0870.1999.00001.x
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Michalakes, J, Govett, M, Benson, R, Black, T, Juang, H, Reinecke, A and Skamarock, B. 2015. NGGPS Level-1 benchmarks and software evaluation. Washington, DC: Technical report, NOAA.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Morgan, MC. 2018. On the dynamics of adjustment in the f-plane shallow water adjoint system. J. Atmos. Sci., 75: 1571–1585. DOI: 10.1175/JAS-D-17-0100.1
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Putman, WM and Lin, S-J. 2007. Finite-volume transport on various cubed-sphere grids. J. Com. Phys., 227: 55–78. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcp.2007.07.022
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Saito, K, Fujita, T, Yamada, Y, Ishida, J, Kumagai, Y, Aranami, K, Ohmori, S, Nagasawa, R, Kumagai, S, Muroi, C, Kato, T, Eito, H and Yamazaki, Y. 2006. The operational JMA nonhydrostatic mesoscale model. Mon. Wea. Rev., 134(4): 1266–1298. DOI: 10.1175/MWR3120.1
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Tian, X and Zou, X. 2020. Development of the tangent linear and adjoint models of the MPAS-Atmosphere dynamic core and applications in adjoint relative sensitivity studies. Tellus A: Dynamic Meteorology and Oceanography, 72(1): 1–17. DOI: 10.1080/16000870.2020.1814602
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Ullrich, PA, Jablonowski, C, Kent, J, Lauritzen, PH, Nair, R, Reed, KA, Zarzycki, CM, Hall, DM, Dazlich, D, Heikes, R, Konor, C, Randall, D, Dubos, T, Meurdesoif, Y, Chen, X, Harris, L, Ku¨hnlein, C, Lee, V, Qaddouri, A, Girard, C, Giorgetta, M, Reinert, D, Klemp, J, Park, S-H, Skamarock, W, Miura, H, Ohno, T, Yoshida, R, Walko, R, Reinecke, A and Viner, K. 2017. DCMIP2016: a review of non-hydrostatic dynamical core design and intercomparison of participating models. Geosci. Model Dev., 10: 4477–4509. DOI: 10.5194/gmd-10-4477-2017
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Vogl, CJ, Steyer, A, Reynolds, DR, Ullrich, PA and Woodward, C. 2019. Evaluation of implicit-explicit additive Runge-Kutta integrators for the HOMME-NH dynamical core. J. Adv. Mod. Earth Sys., 11: 4228–4244. DOI: 10.1029/2019MS001700
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article

Articles in this issue

DOI: https://doi.org/10.16993/tellusa.146 | Journal eISSN: 3035-9554

Journal RSS Feed

Language: English

Page range: 399 - 411

Submitted on: May 26, 2022

Accepted on: Oct 18, 2022

Published on: Nov 25, 2022

Published by: Stockholm University Press

In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services

Keywords:

data assimilation,

non-hydrostatic spectral element forecast model

© 2022 Edward D. Zaron, Boon S. Chua, P. Alex Reinecke, John Michalakes, James D. Doyle, Liang Xu, published by Stockholm University Press
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Volume 74 (2022): Issue 1