Atmospheric inverse modeling with known physical bounds: an example from trace gas emissions
Author:
Miller S. M.,Michalak A. M.,Levi P. J.
Abstract
Abstract. Many inverse problems in the atmospheric sciences involve parameters with known physical constraints. Examples include non-negativity (e.g., emissions of some urban air pollutants) or upward limits implied by reaction or solubility constants. However, probabilistic inverse modeling approaches based on Gaussian assumptions cannot incorporate such bounds and thus often produce unrealistic results. The atmospheric literature lacks consensus on the best means to overcome this problem, and existing atmospheric studies rely on a limited number of the possible methods with little examination of the relative merits of each. This paper investigates the applicability of several approaches to bounded inverse problems and is also the first application of Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) to estimation of atmospheric trace gas fluxes. The approaches discussed here are broadly applicable. A common method of data transformations is found to unrealistically skew estimates for the examined example application. The method of Lagrange multipliers and two MCMC methods yield more realistic and accurate results. In general, the examined MCMC approaches produce the most realistic result but can require substantial computational time. Lagrange multipliers offer an appealing alternative for large, computationally intensive problems when exact uncertainty bounds are less central to the analysis. A synthetic data inversion of US anthropogenic methane emissions illustrates the strengths and weaknesses of each approach.
Publisher
Copernicus GmbH
Reference55 articles.
1. Andrieu, C., de Freitas, N., Doucet, A., and Jordan, M.: An Introduction to MCMC for machine learning, Mach. Learn., 50, 5–43, https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020281327116, 2003. 2. Antoniou, A. and Lu, W.: Practical Optimization: Algorithms and Engineering Applications, Springer, New York, NY, 2007. 3. Barnes, R. and You, K.: Adding bounds to kriging, Math. Geol., 24, 171–176, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00897030, 1992. 4. Bergamaschi, P., Frankenberg, C., Meirink, J. F., Krol, M., Villani, M. G., Houweling, S., Dentener, F., Dlugokencky, E. J., Miller, J. B., Gatti, L. V., Engel, A., and Levin, I.: Inverse modeling of global and regional CH4 emissions using SCIAMACHY satellite retrievals, J. Geophys. Res., 114, D22301, https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JD012287, 2009. 5. Biraud, S. C., Torn, M. S., Smith, J. R., Sweeney, C., Riley, W. J., and Tans, P. P.: A multi-year record of airborne CO2 observations in the US Southern Great Plains, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 6, 751–763, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-6-751-2013, 2013.
|
|