Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
where it is recalled that
E fg denotes the
expected value of its argument. Furthermore, Bennett et al. ( 2000 ) notes that the
expected values of parts
m
is the number of observations, and
J B and
J R of the objective function
J
are
E f J B .
x a / gD Tr
HBH T D 1 /;
.
(12.20)
and
E f J R .
x a / gD Tr
RD 1 /;
.
(12.21)
where Tr
denotes the trace of the matrix argument A . These results may be
further specialized to compute the expected value of subsets of terms in
.
A
/
J B and
J R
l
( Talagrand 1999 ; Desroziers and Ivanov 2001 ). Define
as a projection operator
such that x l D … l
J l
associated with x l
x , then the expected value of
is given by
Desroziers and Ivanov ( 2001 )
T
E f J l .
x a / gD Tr
. l
HBH T D 1 l
/:
(12.22)
k
so that y k D … k
Likewise, define the projection operator
y , then the expected
J k
J R is
value for
of
T
E f J k .
x a / gD Tr
. k
RD 1 k
/:
(12.23)
12.3.2
Validation of Error Variances by Posterior Diagnosis
Desroziers and Ivanov ( 2001 ) utilize the above relations ( 12.22 )and( 12.23 )
to validate the error variances in the objective function based on the posterior
diagnosis of the assimilation system. They demonstrate how to produce realistic
error variances for simulated observations in a cost-effective manner. This approach
was further evaluated and developed by Chapnik et al. ( 2004 , 2006 )and Sadiki and
Fischer ( 2005 ) for operational data assimilation systems. Following Chapnik et al.
( 2004 ), the objective function ( 12.8 ) is rewritten as
B
R
X
X
J l .
J k .
x
/
x
/
J .
x
/ D
C
;
(12.24)
s l
s k
l D 1
k D 1
where s l
R components of the
background and the observations, respectively. The analysis x a .
and s k
B and
are scalar tuning parameters for the
s
/
is now a function
s l ;
s k /
of the tuning parameter vector s D .
( Chapnik et al. 2004 ),
x a .
/ D x b C K
y Hx b /;
.
/.
s
s
(12.25)
.
/
where the tuned Kalman gain , K
s
, takes the form
Search WWH ::




Custom Search