2014
DOI: 10.1002/env.2266
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Physically motivated scale interaction parameterization in reduced rank quadratic nonlinear dynamic spatio‐temporal models

Abstract: aMany environmental spatio-temporal processes are best characterized by nonlinear dynamical evolution. Recently, it has been shown that general quadratic nonlinear models provide a very flexible class of parametric models for such processes. However, such models have a very large potential parameter space that must be reduced for most practical applications, even when one considers a reduced rank state process. We provide a parameterization for such models, which is motivated by physical arguments of wave mode… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
15
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
0
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The GQN forecast distribution shows a substantial warm bias (and does not include the truth), whereas the ensemble QESN forecast distribution is quite good, with its central tendency close to the truth and a reasonable uncertainty range. Previously published examples of GQN long‐lead forecasts for earlier ENSO events have shown that it tends to perform better for the El Niño phase than it does for the La Niña phase, most likely owing to the fact that the El Niño phase evolution is more non‐linear (although, in the past, it has performed better than it did here for the La Niña case; Wikle & Hooten, ; Wikle & Holan, ; Gladish & Wikle, ). It is very encouraging that the ensemble ESN model shows high‐quality forecast distributions for both periods for the 2015–6 ENSO, especially given how efficiently it can be computed.…”
Section: Application: Long‐lead Forecasting Of Pacific Sea Surface Tementioning
confidence: 58%
“…The GQN forecast distribution shows a substantial warm bias (and does not include the truth), whereas the ensemble QESN forecast distribution is quite good, with its central tendency close to the truth and a reasonable uncertainty range. Previously published examples of GQN long‐lead forecasts for earlier ENSO events have shown that it tends to perform better for the El Niño phase than it does for the La Niña phase, most likely owing to the fact that the El Niño phase evolution is more non‐linear (although, in the past, it has performed better than it did here for the La Niña case; Wikle & Hooten, ; Wikle & Holan, ; Gladish & Wikle, ). It is very encouraging that the ensemble ESN model shows high‐quality forecast distributions for both periods for the 2015–6 ENSO, especially given how efficiently it can be computed.…”
Section: Application: Long‐lead Forecasting Of Pacific Sea Surface Tementioning
confidence: 58%
“…The first 10 EOFs, which account for over 80% of the variability in the data, are retained for both the input and response. This same number of EOFs has been used in multiple previous SST studies, i.e., [ 4 , 63 ]. Note, the first two EOFs account for almost of the variation in the data.…”
Section: Applicationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is particularly the case in nonlinear models (e.g., there are O()nα3 parameters to estimate in a GQN model). Again, one can make use of mechanistically‐motivated models and scientific knowledge to parameterize the dynamical evolution . Various model selection approaches can also be used to reduce the parameter space, such as stochastic search variable selection in the low‐rank GQN context …”
Section: Dynamic Spatio‐temporal Modelsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Again, one can make use of mechanistically-motivated models and scientific knowledge to parameterize the dynamical evolution. 20 Various model selection approaches can also be used to reduce the parameter space, such as stochastic search variable selection in the low-rank GQN context. 21 Finally, note that for extremely complicated processes for which large deterministic simulation models are available, it may be easier to incorporate the associated mechanistic information by building emulators (i.e., surrogate models) for the deterministic computer output and using those to inform the DSTM of interest (typically through a prior distribution in a hierarchical setting as described below).…”
Section: Parameter Reductionmentioning
confidence: 99%