Articles | Volume 14, issue 6
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3715-2021
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-14-3715-2021
Development and technical paper
 | 
22 Jun 2021
Development and technical paper |  | 22 Jun 2021

Retrieval of process rate parameters in the general dynamic equation for aerosols using Bayesian state estimation: BAYROSOL1.0

Matthew Ozon, Aku Seppänen, Jari P. Kaipio, and Kari E. J. Lehtinen

Related authors

Aerosol formation and growth rates from chamber experiments using Kalman smoothing
Matthew Ozon, Dominik Stolzenburg, Lubna Dada, Aku Seppänen, and Kari E. J. Lehtinen
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 12595–12611, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-12595-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-12595-2021, 2021
Short summary
Identification of new particle formation events with deep learning
Jorma Joutsensaari, Matthew Ozon, Tuomo Nieminen, Santtu Mikkonen, Timo Lähivaara, Stefano Decesari, M. Cristina Facchini, Ari Laaksonen, and Kari E. J. Lehtinen
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 9597–9615, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-9597-2018,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-9597-2018, 2018
Short summary

Related subject area

Numerical methods
Enhancing single precision with quasi-double precision: achieving double-precision accuracy in the Model for Prediction Across Scales – Atmosphere (MPAS-A) version 8.2.1
Jiayi Lai, Lanning Wang, Qizhong Wu, Yizhou Yang, and Fang Wang
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1089–1102, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1089-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1089-2025, 2025
Short summary
Advances in land surface forecasting: a comparison of LSTM, gradient boosting, and feed-forward neural networks as prognostic state emulators in a case study with ecLand
Marieke Wesselkamp, Matthew Chantry, Ewan Pinnington, Margarita Choulga, Souhail Boussetta, Maria Kalweit, Joschka Bödecker, Carsten F. Dormann, Florian Pappenberger, and Gianpaolo Balsamo
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 921–937, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-921-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-921-2025, 2025
Short summary
Subgrid corrections for the linear inertial equations of a compound flood model – a case study using SFINCS 2.1.1 Dollerup release
Maarten van Ormondt, Tim Leijnse, Roel de Goede, Kees Nederhoff, and Ap van Dongeren
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 843–861, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-843-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-843-2025, 2025
Short summary
Introducing Iterative Model Calibration (IMC) v1.0: a generalizable framework for numerical model calibration with a CAESAR-Lisflood case study
Chayan Banerjee, Kien Nguyen, Clinton Fookes, Gregory Hancock, and Thomas Coulthard
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 803–818, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-803-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-803-2025, 2025
Short summary
Development of a high-order global dynamical core using the discontinuous Galerkin method for an atmospheric large-eddy simulation (LES) and proposal of test cases: SCALE-DG v0.8.0
Yuta Kawai and Hirofumi Tomita
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 725–762, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-725-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-725-2025, 2025
Short summary

Cited articles

Ackleh, A.: Parameter estimation in a structured algal coagulation-fragmentation model, Nonlinear Anal., 28, 837–854, https://doi.org/10.1016/0362-546X(95)00195-2, 1997. a
Ackleh, A. S. and Miller, R. L.: A model for the interaction of phytoplankton aggregates and the environment: approximation and parameter estimation, Inverse Probl. Sci. En., 26, 152–182, https://doi.org/10.1080/17415977.2017.1310856, 2018. a
Aitken, J.: On the Number of Dust Particles in the Atmosphere, T. Roy. Soc. Edin.-Earth, 35, 1–19, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0080456800017592, 1889. a
Almeida, J., Schobesberger, S., Kürten, A., Ortega, I. K., Kupiainen-Määttä, O., Praplan, A. P., Adamov, A., Amorim, A., Bianchi, F., Breitenlechner, M., David, A., Dommen, J., Donahue, N. M., Downard, A., Dunne, E., Duplissy, J., Ehrhart, S., Flagan, R. C., Franchin, A., Guida, R., Hakala, J., Hansel, A., Heinritzi, M., Henschel, H., Jokinen, T., Junninen, H., Kajos, M., Kangasluoma, J., Keskinen, H., Kupc, A., Kurtén, T., Kvashin,A. N., Laaksonen, A., Lehtipalo, K., Leiminger, M., Leppä,J., Loukonen, V., Makhmutov, V., Mathot, S., McGrath, M. J., Nieminen, T., Olenius, T., Onnela, A., Petäjä, T., Riccobono, F., Riipinen, I., Rissanen, M., Rondo, L., Ruuskanen, T., Santos, F. D., Sarnela, N., Schallhart, S., Schnitzhofer, R., Seinfeld, J. H., Simon, M., Sipilä, M., Stozhkov, Y., Stratmann, F., Tomé, A., Tröstl, J., Tsagkogeorgas, G., Vaattovaara, P., Viisanen, Y., Vir-tanen, A., Vrtala, A., Wagner, P. E., Weingartner, E., Wex, H., Williamson, C., Wimmer, D., Ye, P., Yli-Juuti, T., Carslaw, K. S., Kulmala, M., Curtius, J., Baltensperger, U., Worsnop, D. R.,Vehkamäki, H., and Kirkby, J.: Molecular understanding of sulphuric acid-amine particle nucleation in the atmosphere, Nature, 502, 359–363, https://doi.org/10.1038/nature12663, 2013. a
Banks, H., Tran, H., and Woodward, D.: Estimation of Variable Cefficients in the Fokker–Planck Quations Using Moving Node Finite Elements, SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 30, 1574–1602, https://doi.org/10.1137/0730082, 1993. a
Download
Short summary
Experimental research has provided large amounts of high-quality data on aerosol over the last 2 decades. However, inference of the process rates (e.g., the rates at which particles are generated) is still typically done by simple curve-fitting methods and does not assess the credibility of the estimation. The devised method takes advantage of the Bayesian framework to not only retrieve the state of the observed aerosol system but also to estimate the process rates (e.g., growth rate).
Share