Atmospheric inverse modeling with known physical bounds: an example from trace gas emissions

Many inverse problems in the atmospheric sciences involve parameters with known physical constraints. Examples include nonnegativity (e.g., emissions of some urban air pollutants) or upward limits implied by reaction or solubility constants. However, probabilistic inverse modeling approaches based o...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: S. M. Miller, A. M. Michalak, P. J. Levi
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Copernicus Publications 2014-02-01
Series:Geoscientific Model Development
Online Access:http://www.geosci-model-dev.net/7/303/2014/gmd-7-303-2014.pdf
id doaj-0ad7a63bdc544e3ab4134cfeca5e3c40
record_format Article
spelling doaj-0ad7a63bdc544e3ab4134cfeca5e3c402020-11-24T23:59:39ZengCopernicus PublicationsGeoscientific Model Development1991-959X1991-96032014-02-017130331510.5194/gmd-7-303-2014Atmospheric inverse modeling with known physical bounds: an example from trace gas emissionsS. M. Miller0A. M. Michalak1P. J. Levi2Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USADepartment of Global Ecology, Carnegie Institution for Science, Stanford, CA, USADepartment of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USAMany inverse problems in the atmospheric sciences involve parameters with known physical constraints. Examples include nonnegativity (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. <br><br> This paper investigates the applicability of several approaches to bounded inverse problems. A common method of data transformations is found to unrealistically skew estimates for the examined example application. The method of Lagrange multipliers and two Markov chain Monte Carlo (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 option 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.http://www.geosci-model-dev.net/7/303/2014/gmd-7-303-2014.pdf
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author S. M. Miller
A. M. Michalak
P. J. Levi
spellingShingle S. M. Miller
A. M. Michalak
P. J. Levi
Atmospheric inverse modeling with known physical bounds: an example from trace gas emissions
Geoscientific Model Development
author_facet S. M. Miller
A. M. Michalak
P. J. Levi
author_sort S. M. Miller
title Atmospheric inverse modeling with known physical bounds: an example from trace gas emissions
title_short Atmospheric inverse modeling with known physical bounds: an example from trace gas emissions
title_full Atmospheric inverse modeling with known physical bounds: an example from trace gas emissions
title_fullStr Atmospheric inverse modeling with known physical bounds: an example from trace gas emissions
title_full_unstemmed Atmospheric inverse modeling with known physical bounds: an example from trace gas emissions
title_sort atmospheric inverse modeling with known physical bounds: an example from trace gas emissions
publisher Copernicus Publications
series Geoscientific Model Development
issn 1991-959X
1991-9603
publishDate 2014-02-01
description Many inverse problems in the atmospheric sciences involve parameters with known physical constraints. Examples include nonnegativity (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. <br><br> This paper investigates the applicability of several approaches to bounded inverse problems. A common method of data transformations is found to unrealistically skew estimates for the examined example application. The method of Lagrange multipliers and two Markov chain Monte Carlo (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 option 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.
url http://www.geosci-model-dev.net/7/303/2014/gmd-7-303-2014.pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT smmiller atmosphericinversemodelingwithknownphysicalboundsanexamplefromtracegasemissions
AT ammichalak atmosphericinversemodelingwithknownphysicalboundsanexamplefromtracegasemissions
AT pjlevi atmosphericinversemodelingwithknownphysicalboundsanexamplefromtracegasemissions
_version_ 1725446886601523200