[MITgcm-devel] seaice adjoint and EVP

[Jinlun Zhang]

It is better to set LSR_ERROR          =1e-4.
Jinlun

Dimitris Menemenlis wrote:

> Hi Martin,
>
>> 1. Are these figures all with with zMin = 0?
>
>
> Yes, all the figures and results under
> http://ecco2.jpl.nasa.gov/data1/arctic/output/tests/
> (except for the oldtest subdirectory) are with zMin=0.
>
>> 2. Do you have an EVP run that does not blow up at all (regardless of 
>> noise)?
>>
>>
>>
>>
> I have not run any of the zMin=0/SEAICEuseFlooding=.true. tests out 
> for very
> long, but I am almost certain that none of these new integrations will 
> crash,
> including the SEAICE_deltaTevp=60.
> The crashes had to do with snow accumulation and could happen to both 
> LSR or to
> EVP solutions.
>
>> 3. What's the convergence criterion for LSR, and how many interations 
>> do you allow/do? In other words how close is the LSR solution to VP?
>
>
>       LSR_ERROR          = 2e-4,
>       SOLV_MAX_ITERS=1500
>
>> c. the same is true for the wind-ice/ocean-ice stress terms which in 
>> involve
>>  averaging perpendicular to the stripes (unless the turning angle is not
>> equal to zero, in which case there is also averaging in the other 
>> directions,
>> but you don't do that, do you?).
>
>
> No I use SEAICE_airTurnAngle=SEAICE_waterTurnAngle=0.
>
>> About question 3 (is it really a VP solution): Could you diagnose 
>> SIsigI and SIsigII (snapshots!!!! I guess one is enough) for all (or 
>> some) solutions and
>>  plot them (plot(SIsigII(:),SIsigI(:),'x')? These should be the 
>> principle components of sigma normalized by the strength/pressure P.
>
>
> With SEAICE_dumpFreq, SIGMA1, SIGMA2, and SIGMA12 are diagnosed by 
> default for
> the EVP solutions but not for LSR.  Are these the same as SIsigI and 
> SIsigII?
> Figure for SIGMA1, SIGMA2 for EVP solution is here:
> http://ecco2.jpl.nasa.gov/data1/arctic/output/tests/figs/SIGMA2232.ps
> Does it look as expected?
>
>> I am also a little concerned that the LSR and EVP solutions look so 
>> different
>> in the ice-covered area, can that be attributed to that different 
>> boundary
>> conditons? Can you try a run with no slip for the evp solver?
>
>
> Is LSR no slip by default?  How do you specify no slip for evp solver?
>
>> I guess we need to talk about this a little. Maybe tomorrow?
>
>
> I will be in transit to DC tomorrow, coming back Wednesday evening.  I 
> can try calling or skyping you but e-mail is easier until I come back 
> to office.
>
> D.
>
> _______________________________________________
> MITgcm-devel mailing list
> MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
> http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-devel