Coarse predictions of dipole reversals by low-dimensional modeling and data assimilation

Abstract Low-dimensional models for Earth’s magnetic dipole may be a powerful tool for studying large-scale dipole dynamics over geological time scales, where direct numerical simulation remains challenging. We investigate the utility of several low-dimensional models by calibrating them against the signed relative paleointensity over the past 2 million years. Model calibrations are done by “data assimilation” which allows us to incorporate nonlinearity and uncertainty into the computations. We find that the data assimilation is successful, in the sense that a relative error is below 8% for all models and data sets we consider. The successful assimilation of paleomagnetic data into low-dimensional models suggests that, on millennium time scales, the occurrence of dipole reversals mainly depends on the large-scale behavior of the dipole field, and is rather independent of the detailed morphology of the field. This, in turn, suggests that large-scale dynamics of the dipole may be predictable for much longer periods than the detailed morphology of the field, which is predictable for about one century. We explore these ideas and introduce a concept of “coarse predictions”, along with a sound numerical framework for computing them, and a series of tests that can be applied to assess their quality. Our predictions make use of low-dimensional models and assimilation of paleomagnetic data and, therefore, rely on the assumption that currently available paleomagnetic data are sufficiently accurate, in particular with respect to the timing of reversals, to allow for coarse predictions of reversals. Under this assumption, we conclude that coarse predictions of dipole reversals are within reach. Specifically, using low-dimensional models and data assimilation enables us to reliably predict a time-window of 4 kyr during which a reversal will occur, without being precise about the timing of the reversal. Indeed, our results lead us to forecast that no reversal of the Earth’s magnetic field is to be expected within the next few millennia. Moreover, we confirm that the precise timing of reversals is difficult to predict, and that reversal predictions based on intensity thresholds are unreliable, which highlights the value of our model based coarse predictions.

[1]  Matthias Morzfeld,et al.  Implicit particle filters for data assimilation , 2010, 1005.4002.

[2]  C. Johnson,et al.  A paleomagnetic power spectrum , 2005 .

[3]  Johannes Wicht,et al.  A Simple Stochastic Model for Dipole Moment Fluctuations in Numerical Dynamo Simulations , 2016, Front. Earth Sci..

[4]  Mioara Mandea,et al.  The Magnetic Field of Planet Earth , 2010 .

[5]  S. Fauve,et al.  Chaotic dynamics of the magnetic field generated by dynamo action in a turbulent flow , 2008 .

[6]  P. Courtier,et al.  Variational Assimilation of Meteorological Observations With the Adjoint Vorticity Equation. Ii: Numerical Results , 2007 .

[7]  G. Glatzmaier,et al.  Magnetic Polarity Reversals in the Core , 2015 .

[8]  G. Hulot,et al.  Stationary and nonstationary behaviour within the geomagnetic polarity time scale , 1997 .

[9]  C. Constable,et al.  GJI Geomagnetism, rock magnetism and palaeomagnetism A stochastic model for palaeomagnetic field variations , 2013 .

[10]  A. Chorin,et al.  Implicit sampling for particle filters , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[11]  Dipole fluctuations and the duration of geomagnetic polarity transitions , 2015 .

[12]  C. Johnson,et al.  PADM2M: a penalized maximum likelihood model of the 0–2 Ma palaeomagnetic axial dipole moment , 2011 .

[13]  H. Matsui,et al.  A physical interpretation of stochastic models for fluctuations in the Earth's dipole field , 2014 .

[14]  G. Hulot,et al.  The geomagnetic secular‐variation timescale in observations and numerical dynamo models , 2011 .

[15]  Matthias Morzfeld,et al.  A random map implementation of implicit filters , 2011, J. Comput. Phys..

[16]  P. Courtier,et al.  Variational Assimilation of Meteorological Observations With the Adjoint Vorticity Equation. I: Theory , 2007 .

[17]  P. Kloeden,et al.  Numerical Solution of Stochastic Differential Equations , 1992 .

[18]  A. Fournier,et al.  Deciphering records of geomagnetic reversals , 2016, Reviews of geophysics.

[19]  D. Schmitt,et al.  The geodynamo as a bistable oscillator , 2001 .

[20]  Eric Blayo,et al.  Advanced Data Assimilation for Geosciences , 2014 .

[21]  C. Jones,et al.  A convection driven geodynamo reversal model , 1999 .

[22]  Johannes Wicht,et al.  Polarity Reversals from Paleomagnetic Observations and Numerical Dynamo Simulations , 2010 .

[23]  An analysis of the fluctuations of the geomagnetic dipole , 2007, 0707.0623.

[24]  E. Thébault,et al.  Inference on core surface flow from observations and 3‐D dynamo modelling , 2011 .

[25]  Catherine Constable,et al.  Is Earth's magnetic field reversing? , 2006 .

[26]  Emmanuel Dormy,et al.  Morphology of field reversals in turbulent dynamos , 2010 .

[27]  G. Hulot,et al.  Statistical properties of reversals and chrons in numerical dynamos and implications for the geodynamo , 2013 .

[28]  L. Meynadier,et al.  Geomagnetic dipole strength and reversal rate over the past two million years , 2005, Nature.

[29]  P. Nozières Reversals of the earth's magnetic field: An attempt at a relaxation model , 1978 .

[30]  W. Lowrie,et al.  Geomagnetic Polarity Timescales and Reversal Frequency Regimes , 2003 .

[31]  T. Rikitake,et al.  Oscillations of a system of disk dynamos , 1958, Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society.

[32]  Gauthier Hulot,et al.  Earth's dynamo limit of predictability , 2010 .

[33]  Alexandre Fournier,et al.  A case for variational geomagnetic data assimilation: insights from a one-dimensional, nonlinear, and sparsely observed MHD system , 2007, 0705.1777.

[34]  Peter Jan,et al.  Particle Filtering in Geophysical Systems , 2009 .

[35]  Timothy J. Robinson,et al.  Sequential Monte Carlo Methods in Practice , 2003 .

[36]  Analysis of the variability of the axial dipole moment of a numerical geodynamo model , 2009 .

[37]  G. Feingold,et al.  Aerosol–cloud–precipitation system as a predator-prey problem , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[38]  C. Constable,et al.  A stochastic model for palaeomagnetic field variations , 2013 .

[39]  A. Chorin,et al.  Implicit Particle Methods and Their Connection with Variational Data Assimilation , 2012, 1205.1830.

[40]  P. Olson,et al.  Controls on geomagnetic reversals and core evolution by mantle convection in the Phanerozoic , 2013 .

[41]  Gauthier Hulot,et al.  An Introduction to Data Assimilation and Predictability in Geomagnetism , 2010 .

[42]  Gauthier Hulot,et al.  GJI Geomagnetism, rock magnetism and palaeomagnetism Earth's dynamo limit of predictability controlled by magnetic dissipation , 2011 .

[43]  Christopher C. Finlay,et al.  Gyre-driven decay of the Earth's magnetic dipole , 2016, Nature Communications.

[44]  C. Laj,et al.  An impending geomagnetic transition? Hints from the past , 2015, Front. Earth Sci..

[45]  A. Chorin,et al.  Implicit particle filtering for models with partial noise, and an application to geomagnetic data assimilation , 2011, 1109.3664.

[46]  S. Cande,et al.  Revised calibration of the geomagnetic polarity timescale for the Late Cretaceous and Cenozoic , 1995 .

[47]  W. Kuang,et al.  Data assimilation in a sparsely observed one-dimensional modeled MHD system , 2007 .

[48]  M. Bocquet,et al.  Beyond Gaussian Statistical Modeling in Geophysical Data Assimilation , 2010 .

[49]  Gauthier Hulot,et al.  A statistical approach to the Earth's main magnetic field , 1994 .

[50]  G. Brier VERIFICATION OF FORECASTS EXPRESSED IN TERMS OF PROBABILITY , 1950 .

[51]  G. Glatzmaier,et al.  A three-dimensional convective dynamo solution with rotating and finitely conducting inner core and mantle , 1995 .

[52]  Emmanuel Dormy,et al.  Simple mechanism for reversals of earth's magnetic field. , 2008, Physical review letters.

[53]  G. Evensen Data Assimilation: The Ensemble Kalman Filter , 2006 .

[54]  Mioara Mandea,et al.  Small-scale structure of the geodynamo inferred from Oersted and Magsat satellite data , 2002, Nature.

[55]  A. Chorin,et al.  Stochastic Tools in Mathematics and Science , 2005 .

[56]  Rémi Bardenet,et al.  Monte Carlo Methods , 2013, Encyclopedia of Social Network Analysis and Mining. 2nd Ed..

[57]  C. Gissinger,et al.  A new deterministic model for chaotic reversals , 2012 .

[58]  M. McElhinny,et al.  Reversals of the Earth's magnetic field and temporal variations of the dynamo families , 1991 .

[59]  Lance M. Leslie,et al.  Tropical Cyclone Prediction Using a Barotropic Model Initialized by a Generalized Inverse Method , 1993 .

[60]  D. Gubbins,et al.  Symmetry properties of the dynamo equations for palaeomagnetism and geomagnetism , 1993 .

[61]  J. Aubert,et al.  Inferring internal properties of Earth's core dynamics and their evolution from surface observations and a numerical geodynamo model , 2011 .

[62]  H. Matsui,et al.  A power spectrum for the geomagnetic dipole moment , 2015 .

[63]  G. Feingold,et al.  A model of coupled oscillators applied to the aerosol–cloud–precipitation system , 2013 .

[64]  Johannes Wicht,et al.  A gaussian model for simulated geomagnetic field reversals , 2015, 1501.07118.

[65]  Peter Driscoll,et al.  Dipole collapse and reversal precursors in a numerical dynamo , 2009 .