Cited by 5,371Oceanographic and Atmospheric ProcessesMeteorological Phenomena and SimulationsTarget Tracking and Data Fusion in Sensor Networks

Sequential data assimilation with a nonlinear quasi‐geostrophic model using Monte Carlo methods to forecast error statistics

Open access
Evensen, Geir·1994·Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans

Abstract

A new sequential data assimilation method is discussed. It is based on forecasting the error statistics using Monte Carlo methods, a better alternative than solving the traditional and computationally extremely demanding approximate error covariance equation used in the extended Kalman filter. The unbounded error growth found in the extended Kalman filter, which is caused by an overly simplified closure in the error covariance equation, is completely eliminated. Open boundaries can be handled as long as the ocean model is well posed. Well‐known numerical instabilities associated with the error covariance equation are avoided because storage and evolution of the error covariance matrix itself are not needed. The results are also better than what is provided by the extended Kalman filter since there is no closure problem and the quality of the forecast error statistics therefore improves. The method should be feasible also for more sophisticated primitive equation models. The computational load for reasonable accuracy is only a fraction of what is required for the extended Kalman filter and is given by the storage of, say, 100 model states for an ensemble size of 100 and thus CPU requirements of the order of the cost of 100 model integrations. The proposed method can therefore be used with realistic nonlinear ocean models on large domains on existing computers, and it is also well suited for parallel computers and clusters of workstations where each processor integrates a few members of the ensemble.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1029/94jc00572

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Evensen, G.
Corresponding author
Evensen, Geir
Venue
Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans
Published
1994-05-15
Volume
99
Issue
C5
Pages
10143-10162
ISSN
0148-0227 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2157098139
Cited by
5,371
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 212 · 2025: 249 · 2024: 275 · 2023: 267 · 2022: 378 · 2021: 331 · 2020: 273 · 2019: 259 · 2018: 261 · 2017: 262 · 2016: 237 · 2015: 279 · 2014: 260 · 2013: 230 · 2012: 233
FWCI
4.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres (publishedVersion)
  • NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Oceanography › Oceanographic and Atmospheric Processes
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Meteorological Phenomena and Simulations
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Target Tracking and Data Fusion in Sensor Networks
Keywords
sequential data assimilation, Monte Carlo methods, extended Kalman filter, error growth, closure problem, open boundary conditions, ensemble methods, ocean forecasting, parallel computing

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review