It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

- All Categories 2.3K
- Chat 502
- Study Groups 21
- Petri Nets 9
- Epidemiology 4
- Leaf Modeling 2
- Review Sections 9
- MIT 2020: Programming with Categories 51
- MIT 2020: Lectures 20
- MIT 2020: Exercises 25
- Baez ACT 2019: Online Course 339
- Baez ACT 2019: Lectures 79
- Baez ACT 2019: Exercises 149
- Baez ACT 2019: Chat 50
- UCR ACT Seminar 4
- General 72
- Azimuth Code Project 110
- Statistical methods 4
- Drafts 10
- Math Syntax Demos 15
- Wiki - Latest Changes 3
- Strategy 113
- Azimuth Project 1.1K
- - Spam 1
- News and Information 148
- Azimuth Blog 149
- - Conventions and Policies 21
- - Questions 43
- Azimuth Wiki 715

Options

This paper by Thual et al [1], shows an incredibly good model fit of an ENSO characteristic:

The math is heavy-duty as it modifies the long-wave approximation used by others.

"The temporal evolution of the Tilt and WWV modes is as in the recharge–discharge model from Jin (1997a,b). One may interpret the Tilt mode as a dynamical mode adjusting very rapidly to wind stress forcing (approximated here as adjusting instantly), and the WWV mode as a dynamical mode adjusting slowly to wind stress forcing with dissipation rate $\sigma$ (Burgers et al. 2005). Consistently with Jin (1997a,b), Fedorov (2010), and Clarke (2010), the WWV mode arises from the propagation and reflection of equatorial waves that are not in phase with wind stress forcing. Here, $\sigma$ is the same as the one solved without wind stress forcing in Eqs. (8)–(11), which is consistent because the WWV mode is obtained from a linear composition of those solutions."

The interesting result is that they claim that the ENSO response is "very rapid" to changes in the wind stress forcing. This is in keeping with the model that I am applying, which uses the QBO as a wind forcing.

What I don't quite comprehend is that it uses the wind directly via reanalysis of wind stress (data from here), and so one can't really isolate the causality. Is the wind stress partly the result of the ocean upwelling/downwelling or the only causal agent?

The correlation between atmospheric pressure and wind is well known, as wind is caused by pressure gradients. But we also know that wind can force surface water to assumulate on the windward side, thus leading to thermocline tilting as gravitational forces take effect.

So let us agree that this fit is great and that we can assume that the wind is causing the ENSO fluctuations; but unless one can actually predict what the wind will do in the future, we are still left with nothing to extrapolate against. That is why the model that I have been using, which applies the QBO as the main forcing, has more potential for prediction. The QBO is highly periodic, with a period of 28 months that can be extrapolated into the future, subject to any jitter that it will experience. On the other hand, the TW model by Thual still needs a model to predict the wind stress.

I think this is important, as the understanding of ENSO form physical principles is advancing rapidly, thanks to research by Clarke and others that have been looking at wind curl.

This is what Thual have to say:

"This ocean adjustment involves considerable energy exchanges through variations of the equatorial thermocline depth (Goddard and Philander 2000; Brown a nd Fedorov 2010b), and explains the

relatively high predictabilityof ENSO (Cane and Zebiak 1985; Meinen and McPhaden 2000;McPhaden 2012)."

Note that Thual state that there is **relatively high predictability** of ENSO (my emphasis). Yet without predictability of wind we arrive at a Catch-22 situation; in fact, one that all models that depend on erratic EOF data as factors find themselves in. Unless the EOF can be modeled, one is left flapping in the breeze when it comes to predictive power.

[1]S. Thual, B. Dewitte, N. Ayoub, and O. Thual, “An Asymptotic Expansion for the Recharge-Discharge Model of ENSO,” Journal of Physical Oceanography, vol. 43, no. 7, pp. 1407–1416, 2013. https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/file/index/docid/951088/filename/jpo-d-12-0161_2E1.pdf

## Comments

Paul there is an ambiguity here, you could have a fit to a curve, which is quite close e.g. SVR or NN, but forecast using that fit is inaccurate, I get that all the time!

That is why if you do backtesting you see that these seemingly good mathematical curve-fittings are actually not that great to forecast with.

What the plot in your post shows is the

past valuesbetween the curve and fit are snug, that does not say anything about the error forforecast (t) - actual (t+1)

This error could be substantial due to the time shift since Forecast is not fit! Forecast (t) gives you the value time shifted by 1 into future, while fit is giving you time 0 shifted forecast or called fit.

fitforecast present value at present time, forecast issues the next value predicted at present. Hugely different computations.I find these sorts of presentations (theirs not yours) suspect

Dara

`Paul there is an ambiguity here, you could have a fit to a curve, which is quite close e.g. SVR or NN, but forecast using that fit is inaccurate, I get that all the time! That is why if you do backtesting you see that these seemingly good mathematical curve-fittings are actually not that great to forecast with. What the plot in your post shows is the **past values** between the curve and fit are snug, that does not say anything about the error for forecast (t) - actual (t+1) This error could be substantial due to the time shift since Forecast is not fit! Forecast (t) gives you the value time shifted by 1 into future, while fit is giving you time 0 shifted forecast or called fit. **fit** forecast present value at present time, forecast issues the next value predicted at present. Hugely different computations. I find these sorts of presentations (theirs not yours) suspect Dara`

Dara, I would go with Thual's method in a heartbeat if there was some method to predict the wind. .

`Dara, I would go with Thual's method in a heartbeat if there was some method to predict the wind. .`

There is no wind data until recently with the advent of GPM and TRMM data, the known wind data is mostly made up (guessed and interpolated).

So don't hold your breath.

`There is no wind data until recently with the advent of GPM and TRMM data, the known wind data is mostly made up (guessed and interpolated). So don't hold your breath.`