The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Comparison of Hybrid-4DEnVar and Hybrid-4DVar Data Assimilation Methods for Global NWP
Abstract
The Met Office has developed an ensemble-variational data assimilation method (hybrid-4DEnVar) as a potential replacement for the hybrid four-dimensional variational data assimilation (hybrid-4DVar), which is the current operational method for global NWP. Both are four-dimensional variational methods, using a hybrid combination of a fixed climatological model of background error covariances with localized covariances from an ensemble of current forecasts designed to describe the structure of “errors of the day.” The fundamental difference between the methods is their modeling of the time evolution of errors within each data assimilation window: 4DVar uses a linear model and its adjoint and 4DEnVar uses a localized linear combination of nonlinear forecasts. Both hybrid-4DVar and hybrid-4DEnVar beat their three-dimensional versions, which are equivalent, in NWP trials. With settings based on the current operational system, hybrid-4DVar performs better than hybrid-4DEnVar. Idealized experiments designed to compare the time evolution of covariances in the methods are described: the basic 4DEnVar represents the evolution of ensemble errors as well as 4DVar. However, 4DVar also represents the evolution of errors from the climatological covariances, whereas 4DEnVar does not. This difference is the main cause of the superiority of hybrid-4DVar. Another difference is that the authors’ 4DVar explicitly penalizes rapid variations in the analysis increment trajectory, while the authors’ 4DEnVar contains no dynamical constaints on imbalance. The authors describe a four-dimensional incremental analysis update (4DIAU) method that filters out the high-frequency oscillations introduced by the poorly balanced 4DEnVar increments. Possible methods for improving hybrid-4DEnVar are discussed.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
The quiet revolution of numerical weather prediction
Bauer, P., Thorpe, A., & Brunet, G. (2015) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature14956 · Cited by 2,729
Digital twin: values, challenges and enablers from a modeling perspective
Rasheed, A., San, O., & Kvamsdal, T. (2020) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2020.2970143 · Cited by 1,952
Data assimilation in the geosciences: An overview of methods, issues, and perspectives
Carrassi, A., Bocquet, M., Bertino, L., & Evensen, G. (2018) · WIREs Climate Change · doi:10.1002/wcc.535 · Cited by 867
Review of the Ensemble Kalman Filter for Atmospheric Data Assimilation
Houtekamer, P. L., & Zhang, F. (2016) · Monthly Weather Review · doi:10.1175/mwr-d-15-0440.1 · Cited by 674
Digital Twin: Values, Challenges and Enablers
Rasheed, A., San, O., & Kvamsdal, T. (2019) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1910.01719 · Cited by 81
Metadata
- Authors
- Lorenc, A. C., Bowler, N. E., Clayton, A. M., Pring, S. R., & Fairbairn, D.
- Venue
- Monthly Weather Review
- Publisher
- American Meteorological Society
- Published
- 2015-01-01
- Volume
- 143
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 212-229
- ISSN
- 0027-0644 (ISSN-L)
- 1520-0493
- OpenAlex
- W2100335374
- Cited by
- 218
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 12.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparison of Hybrid-4DEnVar and Hybrid-4DVar Data Assimilation Methods for Global NWP. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1175/mwr-d-14-00195.1
- The paper
- Lorenc, A. C., Bowler, N. E., Clayton, A. M., Pring, S. R., & Fairbairn, D. (2015). Comparison of Hybrid-4DEnVar and Hybrid-4DVar Data Assimilation Methods for Global NWP. Monthly Weather Review. https://doi.org/10.1175/mwr-d-14-00195.1
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.