Articles | Volume 10, issue 10
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-3695-2017
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-3695-2017
Methods for assessment of models
 | 
10 Oct 2017
Methods for assessment of models |  | 10 Oct 2017

Atmospheric inverse modeling via sparse reconstruction

Nils Hase, Scot M. Miller, Peter Maaß, Justus Notholt, Mathias Palm, and Thorsten Warneke

Related authors

Estimation of isentropic stirring and mixing and their diagnosis for the stratospheric polar vortex
Zhiting Wang, Nils Hase, Wenshou Tian, and Mengchu Tao
Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2021-1096,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2021-1096, 2022
Publication in ACP not foreseen
Short summary

Related subject area

Atmospheric sciences
The MESSy DWARF (based on MESSy v2.55.2)
Astrid Kerkweg, Timo Kirfel, Duong H. Do, Sabine Griessbach, Patrick Jöckel, and Domenico Taraborrelli
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1265–1286, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1265-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1265-2025, 2025
Short summary
An enhanced emission module for the PALM model system 23.10 with application for PM10 emission from urban domestic heating
Edward C. Chan, Ilona J. Jäkel, Basit Khan, Martijn Schaap, Timothy M. Butler, Renate Forkel, and Sabine Banzhaf
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1119–1139, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1119-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1119-2025, 2025
Short summary
Identifying lightning processes in ERA5 soundings with deep learning
Gregor Ehrensperger, Thorsten Simon, Georg J. Mayr, and Tobias Hell
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1141–1153, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1141-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1141-2025, 2025
Short summary
Sensitivity of predicted ultrafine particle size distributions in Europe to different nucleation rate parameterizations using PMCAMx-UF v2.2
David Patoulias, Kalliopi Florou, and Spyros N. Pandis
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1103–1118, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1103-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1103-2025, 2025
Short summary
Explaining neural networks for detection of tropical cyclones and atmospheric rivers in gridded atmospheric simulation data
Tim Radke, Susanne Fuchs, Christian Wilms, Iuliia Polkova, and Marc Rautenhaus
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1017–1039, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1017-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1017-2025, 2025
Short summary

Cited articles

Andrews, A. E., Kofler, J. D., Trudeau, M. E., Williams, J. C., Neff, D. H., Masarie, K. A., Chao, D. Y., Kitzis, D. R., Novelli, P. C., Zhao, C. L., Dlugokencky, E. J., Lang, P. M., Crotwell, M. J., Fischer, M. L., Parker, M. J., Lee, J. T., Baumann, D. D., Desai, A. R., Stanier, C. O., De Wekker, S. F. J., Wolfe, D. E., Munger, J. W., and Tans, P. P.: CO2, CO, and CH4 measurements from tall towers in the NOAA Earth System Research Laboratory's Global Greenhouse Gas Reference Network: instrumentation, uncertainty analysis, and recommendations for future high-accuracy greenhouse gas monitoring efforts, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 7, 647–687, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-7-647-2014, 2014.
Andrieu, C., de Freitas, N., Doucet, A., and Jordan, M. I.: An Introduction to MCMC for Machine Learning, Mach. Learn., 50, 5–43, https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020281327116, 2003.
Banks, H., Holm, K., and Robbins, D.: Standard error computations for uncertainty quantification in inverse problems: Asymptotic theory vs. bootstrapping, Math. Comput. Model., 52, 1610–1625, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcm.2010.06.026, 2010.
Beck, A. and Teboulle, M.: A Fast Iterative Shrinkage-Thresholding Algorithm for Linear Inverse Problems, SIAM J. Img. Sci., 2, 183–202, https://doi.org/10.1137/080716542, 2009.
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.
Download
Short summary
Inverse modeling uses atmospheric measurements to estimate emissions of greenhouse gases, which are key to understand the climate system. However, the measurement information alone is typically insufficient to provide reasonable emission estimates. Additional information is required. This article applies modern mathematical inversion techniques to formulate such additional knowledge. It is a prime example of how such tools can improve the quality of estimates compared to commonly used methods.
Share