A multi-model ensemble method that combines imperfect models through learning

Abstract. In the current multi-model ensemble approach climate model simulations are combined a posteriori. In the method of this study the models in the ensemble exchange information during simulations and learn from historical observations to combine their strengths into a best representation of the observed climate. The method is developed and tested in the context of small chaotic dynamical systems, like the Lorenz 63 system. Imperfect models are created by perturbing the standard parameter values. Three imperfect models are combined into one super-model, through the introduction of connections between the model equations. The connection coefficients are learned from data from the unperturbed model, that is regarded as the truth. The main result of this study is that after learning the super-model is a very good approximation to the truth, much better than each imperfect model separately. These illustrative examples suggest that the super-modeling approach is a promising strategy to improve weather and climate simulations.

[1]  S. Solomon.  The Physical Science Basis : Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change , 2007 .

[2]  Thomas Jung,et al.  Understanding the local and global impacts of model physics changes: an aerosol example , 2008 .

[3]  Hong Li,et al.  Data Assimilation as Synchronization of Truth and Model: Experiments with the Three-Variable Lorenz System* , 2006 .

[4]  Thomas Jung,et al.  Systematic errors of the atmospheric circulation in the ECMWF forecasting system , 2005 .

[5]  Edward N. Lorenz,et al.  Irregularity: a fundamental property of the atmosphere* , 1984 .

[6]  C. M. Reeves,et al.  Function minimization by conjugate gradients , 1964, Comput. J..

[7]  Jeffrey B. Weiss,et al.  Synchronicity in predictive modelling: a new view of data assimilation , 2006 .

[8]  E. Lorenz.  Deterministic nonperiodic flow , 1963 .

[9]  W. Hazeleger,et al.  Optimizing Parameters in an Atmospheric General Circulation Model , 2005 .

[10]  John A. Nelder,et al.  A Simplex Method for Function Minimization , 1965, Comput. J..

[11]  Lennaert van Veen,et al.  Active and passive ocean regimes in a low-order climate model , 2001 .

[12]  David Medvigy,et al.  The Ocean–Land–Atmosphere Model: Optimization and Evaluation of Simulated Radiative Fluxes and Precipitation , 2010 .

[13]  Tim N. Palmer,et al.  Diagnosing the causes of bias in climate models – why is it so hard? , 2011 .

[14]  Joseph Tribbia,et al.  Weak Atlantic–Pacific Teleconnections as Synchronized Chaos , 2004 .

[15]  Reto Knutti,et al.  The use of the multi-model ensemble in probabilistic climate projections , 2007, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[16]  Martin Köhler,et al.  The ECMWF model climate: recent progress through improved physical parametrizations , 2010 .

[17]  Ljupco Kocarev,et al.  Identical synchronization, with translation invariance, implies parameter estimation , 2007 .

[18]  Henry D I Abarbanel,et al.  Parameter and state estimation of experimental chaotic systems using synchronization. , 2009, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[19]  Robert Pincus,et al.  On Constraining Estimates of Climate Sensitivity with Present-Day Observations through Model Weighting , 2011 .

[20]  O. Rössler.  An equation for continuous chaos , 1976 .

[21]  J. Tribbia,et al.  Synchronized chaos in geophysical fluid dynamics. , 2001, Physical review letters.

[22]  Jeffrey S. Whitaker,et al.  Feasibility of a 100-Year Reanalysis Using Only Surface Pressure Data , 2006 .

[23]  Gregory S. Duane,et al.  Consensus on Long-Range Prediction by Adaptive Synchronization of Models , 2009 .