Estimation and calibration of observation impact signals using the Lanczos method in NOAA/NCEP data assimilation system

Despite the tremendous progress that has been made in data assimilation (DA) methodology, observing systems that reduce observation errors, and model improvements that reduce background errors, the analyses produced by the best available DA systems are still different from the truth. Analysis error and error covariance are important since they describe the accuracy of the analyses, and are directly related to the future forecast errors, i.e., the forecast quality. In addition, analysis error covariance is critically important in building an efficient ensemble forecast system (EFS). Estimating analysis error covariance in an ensemble-based Kalman filter DA is straightforward, but it is challenging in variational DA systems, which have been in operation at most NWP (Numerical Weather Prediction) centers. In this study, we use the Lanczos method in the NCEP (the National Centers for Environmental Prediction) Gridpoint Statistical Interpolation (GSI) DA system to look into other important aspects and properties of this method that were not exploited before. We apply this method to estimate the observation impact signals (OIS), which are directly related to the analysis error variances. It is found that the smallest eigenvalue of the transformed Hessian matrix converges to one as the number of minimization iterations increases. When more observations are assimilated, the convergence becomes slower and more eigenvectors are needed to retrieve the observation impacts. It is also found that the OIS over data-rich regions can be represented by the eigenvectors with dominant eigenvalues. Since only a limited number of eigenvectors can be computed due to computational expense, the OIS is severely underestimated, and the analysis error variance is consequently overestimated. It is found that the mean OIS values for temperature and wind components at typical model levels are increased by about 1.5 times when the number of eigenvectors is doubled. We have proposed four different calibration schemes to compensate for the missing trailing eigenvectors. Results show that the method with calibration for a small number of eigenvectors cannot pick up the observation impacts over the regions with fewer observations as well as a benchmark with a large number of eigenvectors, but proper calibrations do enhance and improve the impact signals over regions with more data. When compared with the observation locations, the method generally captures the OIS over regions with more observation data, including satellite data over the southern oceans. Over the tropics, some observation impacts may be missed due to the smaller background errors specified in the GSI, which is not related to the method. It is found that a large number of eigenvectors are needed to retrieve impact signals that resemble the banded structures from satellite observations, particularly over the tropics. Another benefit from the Lanczos method is that the dominant eigenvectors can be used in preconditioning the conjugate gradient algorithm in the GSI to speed up the convergence.

[1]  J. Whitaker,et al.  Ensemble Square Root Filters , 2003, Statistical Methods for Climate Scientists.

[2]  Qin Xu,et al.  Measuring information content from observations for data assimilation: relative entropy versus shannon entropy difference , 2007 .

[3]  Mozheng Wei,et al.  A new measure of ensemble performance: Perturbation versus error correlation analysis (PECA) , 2003 .

[4]  Stephen J. Lord,et al.  The New Global Operational Analysis System at the National Meteorological Center , 1991 .

[5]  P. L. Houtekamer,et al.  A System Simulation Approach to Ensemble Prediction , 1996 .

[6]  Alison Fowler,et al.  Measures of observation impact in non-Gaussian data assimilation , 2012 .

[7]  Liang Xu,et al.  Development of NAVDAS-AR: formulation and initial tests of the linear problem , 2005 .

[9]  Istvan Szunyogh,et al.  A local ensemble transform Kalman filter data assimilation system for the NCEP global model , 2008 .

[10]  Craig H. Bishop,et al.  Adaptive sampling with the ensemble transform Kalman filter , 2001 .

[11]  Ronald M. Errico,et al.  The estimation of analysis error characteristics using an observation systems simulation experiment , 2007 .

[12]  Yuejian Zhu,et al.  Analysis differences and error variance estimates from multi-centre analysis data , 2010 .

[13]  Yuejian Zhu,et al.  Initial perturbations based on the ensemble transform (ET) technique in the NCEP global operational forecast system , 2008 .

[14]  C. Bishop,et al.  Ensemble Transform Kalman Filter-based ensemble perturbations in an operational global prediction system at NCEP , 2006 .

[15]  Carolyn A. Reynolds,et al.  Impact of Stochastic Convection on the Ensemble Transform , 2008 .

[16]  Neill E. Bowler,et al.  Comparison of error breeding, singular vectors, random perturbations and ensemble Kalman filter perturbation strategies on a simple model , 2006 .

[17]  Uncertainty in atmospheric temperature analyses , 2008 .

[18]  C. Bishop,et al.  The ensemble‐transform scheme adapted for the generation of stochastic forecast perturbations , 2007 .

[19]  Clive D Rodgers,et al.  Inverse Methods for Atmospheric Sounding: Theory and Practice , 2000 .

[20]  Ronald M. Errico,et al.  Improving Incremental Balance in the GSI 3DVAR Analysis System , 2009 .

[21]  Roger Daley,et al.  NAVDAS: Formulation and Diagnostics , 2001 .

[22]  J. Derber Variational Four-dimensional Analysis Using Quasi-Geostrophic Constraints , 1987 .

[23]  R. Buizza,et al.  A Comparison of the ECMWF, MSC, and NCEP Global Ensemble Prediction Systems , 2005 .

[24]  John Derber,et al.  The National Meteorological Center's spectral-statistical interpolation analysis system , 1992 .

[25]  Thomas M. Hamill,et al.  Ensemble Data Assimilation with the NCEP Global Forecast System , 2008 .

[26]  J. Whitaker,et al.  Ensemble Data Assimilation without Perturbed Observations , 2002 .

[27]  R. Purser,et al.  Three-Dimensional Variational Analysis with Spatially Inhomogeneous Covariances , 2002 .

[28]  Tim N. Palmer,et al.  Ensemble forecasting , 2008, J. Comput. Phys..

[29]  E. Kalnay,et al.  Ensemble Forecasting at NCEP and the Breeding Method , 1997 .

[30]  T. Hamill,et al.  A Comparison of Probabilistic Forecasts from Bred, Singular-Vector, and Perturbed Observation Ensembles , 2000 .

[31]  C. Bishop,et al.  Regional Ensemble Forecasts Using the Ensemble Transform Technique , 2009 .

[32]  Challenges with the Real Time Mesoscale Analysis (RTMA) , 2009 .

[33]  Stanley G. Benjamin,et al.  The Real-Time Mesoscale Analysis at NOAA’s National Centers for Environmental Prediction: Current Status and Development , 2011 .

[34]  Jeffrey L. Anderson An Ensemble Adjustment Kalman Filter for Data Assimilation , 2001 .

[35]  M. Zupanski Maximum Likelihood Ensemble Filter: Theoretical Aspects , 2005 .

[36]  Eugenia Kalnay,et al.  Ensemble Forecasting at NMC: The Generation of Perturbations , 1993 .

[37]  E. Kalnay,et al.  C ○ 2007 The Authors , 2006 .

[38]  K. Swanson,et al.  The Impact of Analysis Error on Medium-Range Weather Forecasts , 2008 .

[39]  Craig H. Bishop,et al.  Evaluation of the Ensemble Transform Analysis Perturbation Scheme at NRL , 2008 .

[40]  Roberto Buizza,et al.  TIGGE: Preliminary results on comparing and combining ensembles , 2008 .

[41]  Neill E. Bowler,et al.  The Benefits of Multianalysis and Poor Man’s Ensembles , 2008 .

[42]  John Derber,et al.  A Global Oceanic Data Assimilation System , 1989 .

[43]  A. Simmons,et al.  The ECMWF operational implementation of four‐dimensional variational assimilation. I: Experimental results with simplified physics , 2007 .

[44]  F. Molteni,et al.  The ECMWF Ensemble Prediction System: Methodology and validation , 1996 .

[45]  Dusanka Zupanski,et al.  Applications of information theory in ensemble data assimilation , 2007 .