[ecco-support] About the uncertainties of mixing parameters in v4r4

[NA Yongsu]

Dear Dimitris,

Well noted. I appreciate your sharing!

Best,
Yongsu

From: Menemenlis, Dimitris (US 329B) <dimitris.menemenlis at jpl.nasa.gov>
Sent: Monday, July 15, 2024 8:46 AM
To: ECCO support list, wider membership <ecco-support at mit.edu>
Cc: NA Yongsu <ynaab at connect.ust.hk>
Subject: Re: [ecco-support] About the uncertainties of mixing parameters in v4r4

Dear Yongsu, unfortunately I do not know how to answer your question except to note that (1) anything that has to do with “prior” ECCO uncertainties is very empirical and arbitrary, as you suspect that it is, and (2) we do not yet have full formal posterior uncertainties for the ECCO solutions.

Some attempts here:
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2020MS002386
https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/79291
https://usclivar.org/sites/default/files/meetings/2015/abstracts/HeimbachLooseNguyen_AMOC2018_36698.pdf
https://repository.oceanbestpractices.org/bitstream/handle/11329/1216/130925311.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/marine-science/articles/10.3389/fmars.2019.00055/full

I throw your question(s) back to ECCO Support list in case someone else has better answer(s).

Cheers, Dimitris



On Jul 13, 2024, at 8:45 PM, NA Yongsu <ynaab at connect.ust.hk<mailto:ynaab at connect.ust.hk>> wrote:

Dear Dimitris Menemenlis,

Thanks for reading this email. I'm Yongsu Na, a PhD student at Hong Kong UST. I've been developing a regional state estimate in the South China Sea based on ECCO v4r4.

I previously inquired ecco-support about how the uncertainty field of diffkr was computed (https://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/ecco-support/2024-March/000741.html<https://urldefense.us/v3/__https://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/ecco-support/2024-March/000741.html__;!!PvBDto6Hs4WbVuu7!PT3QaF9mkSwjpukwGNvwAE1gsu14mWNmdwdAJXJrM3vibERAF_USuilNsjOYE894DB4BuEHDC7qg6hSkRDDKLJp6$>), but couldn't get a reply. I wonder if you could provide me any clues or hints on it. Thank you in advance.

Best wishes,
Yongsu Na



On Mar 19, 2024, at 7:06 AM, NA Yongsu <ynaab at connect.ust.hk<mailto:ynaab at connect.ust.hk>> wrote:

Dear ECCO support team,

I wonder how the uncertainty fields for the three mixing parameters were produced, and how the bounds (specified in data.ctrl) for them were decided. Are they based on a similar way with producing the uncertainties of the atmospheric forcings and the initial conditions? All I could find is a short information in Forget et al. (2015). I’d be thankful if you could direct me to some related materials.

If they are given rather empirically/arbitrarily, will there be any reasonable uncertainty fields for 3d-varying mixing parameters? I’ve been testing a 3d diffkr field produced based on (sparse) observations for my regional state estimate, but using v4r4’s uncertainty field (with interpolation) seems inappropriate if I expect diffkr to be adjusted in log scale along the iterative optimization (the issue reported in Trossman et al. (2022)). Using larger uncertainties (e.g. x10 on the 3d diffkr), with bounds to avoid diffkr from going minus, actually allows diffkr to be adjusted in log scale. But with those large uncertainties, there is an issue that the state estimation doesn’t show consistent convergence towards observational constraints. Any comments would be appreciated!

Best wishes,
Yongsu Na
-----
PhD student
Department of Ocean Science
Hong Kong University of Science and Technology
-----

_______________________________________________
ecco-support mailing list
ecco-support at mit.edu<mailto:ecco-support at mit.edu>
https://urldefense.us/v3/__https://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/ecco-support__;!!PvBDto6Hs4WbVuu7!PWA8Yk9NN3hCnQQzKCZiwjVPFe76PVVzXSKkl-WWlmESWU8gC8wc_Av7wMYGmpwKGykWSjo8MBdDgAR90TAPHuFr$

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/ecco-support/attachments/20240715/7eb9c41f/attachment-0001.htm>