Search for: All records

Ocean mesoscale eddies are often poorly represented in climate models, and therefore, their effects on the large scale circulation must be parameterized. Traditional parameterizations, which represent the bulk effect of the unresolved eddies, can be improved with new subgrid models learned directly from data. Zanna and Bolton (ZB20) applied an equation‐discovery algorithm to reveal an interpretable expression parameterizing the subgrid momentum fluxes by mesoscale eddies through the components of the velocity‐gradient tensor. In this work, we implement the ZB20 parameterization into the primitive‐equation GFDL MOM6 ocean model and test it in two idealized configurations with significantly different dynamical regimes and topography. The original parameterization was found to generate excessive numerical noise near the grid scale. We propose two filtering approaches to avoid the numerical issues and additionally enhance the strength of large‐scale energy backscatter. The filtered ZB20 parameterizations led to improved climatological mean state and energy distributions, compared to the current state‐of‐the‐art energy backscatter parameterizations. The filtered ZB20 parameterizations are scale‐aware and, consequently, can be used with a single value of the non‐dimensional scaling coefficient for a range of resolutions. The successful application of the filtered ZB20 parameterizations to parameterize mesoscale eddies in two idealized configurations offers a promising opportunity to reduce long‐standing biases in global ocean simulations in future studies. 

Subgrid parameterizations of mesoscale eddies continue to be in demand for climate simulations. These subgrid parameterizations can be powerfully designed using physics and/or data‐driven methods, with uncertainty quantification. For example, Guillaumin and Zanna (2021) proposed a Machine Learning (ML) model that predicts subgrid forcing and its local uncertainty. The major assumption and potential drawback of this model is the statistical independence of stochastic residuals between grid points. Here, we aim to improve the simulation of stochastic forcing with generative models of ML, such as Generative adversarial network (GAN) and Variational autoencoder (VAE). Generative models learn the distribution of subgrid forcing conditioned on the resolved flow directly from data and they can produce new samples from this distribution. Generative models can potentially capture not only the spatial correlation but any statistically significant property of subgrid forcing. We test the proposed stochastic parameterizations offline and online in an idealized ocean model. We show that generative models are able to predict subgrid forcing and its uncertainty with spatially correlated stochastic forcing. Online simulations for a range of resolutions demonstrated that generative models are superior to the baseline ML model at the coarsest resolution. 

Abstract We address the question of how to use a machine learned (ML) parameterization in a general circulation model (GCM), and assess its performance both computationally and physically. We take one particular ML parameterization (Guillaumin & Zanna, 2021,https://doi.org/10.1002/essoar.10506419.1) and evaluate the online performance in a different model from which it was previously tested. This parameterization is a deep convolutional network that predicts parameters for a stochastic model of subgrid momentum forcing by mesoscale eddies. We treat the parameterization as we would a conventional parameterization once implemented in the numerical model. This includes trying the parameterization in a different flow regime from that in which it was trained, at different spatial resolutions, and with other differences, all to test generalization. We assess whether tuning is possible, which is a common practice in GCM development. We find the parameterization, without modification or special treatment, to be stable and that the action of the parameterization to be diminishing as spatial resolution is refined. We also find some limitations of the machine learning model in implementation: (a) tuning of the outputs from the parameterization at various depths is necessary; (b) the forcing near boundaries is not predicted as well as in the open ocean; (c) the cost of the parameterization is prohibitively high on central processing units. We discuss these limitations, present some solutions to problems, and conclude that this particular ML parameterization does inject energy, and improve backscatter, as intended but it might need further refinement before we can use it in production mode in contemporary climate models.