Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Adaptive stochastic trajectory modelling in the chaotic advection regime

  • J. G. Esler (a1)

Abstract

Motivated by the goal of improving and augmenting stochastic Lagrangian models of particle dispersion in turbulent flows, techniques from the theory of stochastic processes are applied to a model transport problem. The aim is to find an efficient and accurate method to calculate the total tracer transport between a source and a receptor when the flow between the two locations is weak, rendering direct stochastic Lagrangian simulation prohibitively expensive. Importance sampling methods that combine information from stochastic forward and back trajectory calculations are proposed. The unifying feature of the new methods is that they are developed using the observation that a perfect strategy should distribute trajectories in proportion to the product of the forward and adjoint solutions of the transport problem, a quantity here termed the ‘density of trajectories’ $D(\boldsymbol{x},t)$ . Two such methods are applied to a ‘hard’ model problem, in which the prescribed kinematic flow is in the large-Péclet-number chaotic advection regime, and the transport problem requires simulation of a complex distribution of well-separated trajectories. The first, Milstein’s measure transformation method, involves adding an artificial velocity to the trajectory equation and simultaneously correcting for the weighting given to each particle under the new flow. It is found that, although a ‘perfect’ artificial velocity $\boldsymbol{v}^{\ast }$ exists, which is shown to distribute the trajectories according to $D$ , small errors in numerical estimates of $\boldsymbol{v}^{\ast }$ cumulatively lead to difficulties with the method. A second method is Grassberger’s ‘go-with-the-winners’ branching process, where trajectories found unlikely to contribute to the net transport (losers) are periodically removed, while those expected to contribute significantly (winners) are split. The main challenge of implementation, which is finding an algorithm to select the winners and losers, is solved by a choice that explicitly forces the distribution towards a numerical estimate of $D$ generated from a previous back trajectory calculation. The result is a robust and easily implemented algorithm with typical variance up to three orders of magnitude lower than the direct approach.

Copyright

Corresponding author

Email address for correspondence: gavin@math.ucl.ac.uk

References

Hide All
Ades, M. & van Leeuwen, P. J. 2013 An exploration of the equivalent weights particle filter. Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc. 139, 820840.
Dagan, G. 1987 Theory of solute transport by groundwater. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 19 (1), 183213.
Devenish, B. J., Thomson, D. J., Marenco, F., Leadbetter, S. J., Ricketts, H. & Dacre, H. F. 2011 A study of the arrival over the United Kingdom in April 2010 of the Eyjafjallajokull ash cloud using ground-based lidar and numerical simulations. Atmos. Environ. 48, 152164.
Esler, J. G. 2008 Robust and leaky transport barriers in unstable baroclinic flows. Phys. Fluids 20, 116602.
Forster, C., Stohl, A. & Seibert, P. 2007 Parameterization of convective transport in a Lagrangian particle dispersion model and its evaluation. J. Appl. Meteorol. 46, 403422.
Gardiner, C. W. 2009 Stochastic Methods: A Handbook for the Natural and Social Sciences, 4th edn. Springer.
Grassberger, P. 1997 Prune-enriched Rosenbluth method: simulations of ${\it\theta}$ polymers of chain length up to 1000 000. Phys. Rev. E 56, 36823693.
Grassberger, P. 2002 Go with the winners: a general Monte-Carlo strategy. Comput. Phys. Commun. 147, 6470.
Haynes, P. H. 2011 Transport and mixing of atmospheric pollutants. In Environmental Hazards: The Fluid Mechanics and Geophysics of Extreme Events (ed. Moffatt, H. K. & Shuckburgh, E. F.). World Scientific.
Haynes, P. H., Poet, D. & Shuckburgh, E. F. 2007 Transport and mixing in dynamically consistent flows. J. Atmos. Sci. 64, 36403651.
Haynes, P. H. & Vanneste, J. 2014 Dispersion in the large-deviation regime. Part I. Shear flows and periodic flows. J. Fluid Mech. 745, 321350.
Hourdin, F. & Talagrand, O. 2006 Eulerian backtracking of atmospheric tracers. I: Adjoint derivation and parametrization of subgrid-scale transport. Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc. 132, 567583.
Jones, A. R., Thomson, D. J., Hort, M. & Devenish, B. 2007 The UK Met Office’s next-generation atmospheric dispersion model, NAME III. In Air Pollution Modeling and its Application XVII (Proceedings of the 27th NATO/CCMS International Technical Meeting on Air Pollution Modelling and its Application) (ed. Borrego, C. & Norman, A.-L.), pp. 580589. Springer.
Kloeden, P. E. & Platen, E. 1992 Numerical Solution of Stochastic Differential Equations, 4th edn. Springer.
Majda, A. J. & Kramer, P. R. 1999 Simplified models for turbulent diffusion: theory, numerical modelling and physical phenomena. Phys. Rep. 314, 237574.
Methven, J., Arnold, S. R., Stohl, A., Evans, M. J., Avery, M., Law, K., Lewis, A. C., Monks, P. S., Parrish, D. D., Reeves, C., Schlager, H., Atlas, E., Blake, D. R., Coe, H., Crosier, J., Flocke, F. M., Holloway, J. S., Hopkins, J. R., McQuaid, J., Purvis, R., Rappengluck, B., Singh, H. B., Watson, N. M., Whalley, L. K. & Williams, P. I. 2006 Establishing Lagrangian connections between observations within air masses crossing the Atlantic during the ICARTT experiment. J. Geophys. Res. 111, D23S62.
Milstein, G. N. 1995 Numerical Solution of Stochastic Differential Equations. Kluwer.
Milstein, G. N., Schoenmakers, J. G. M. & Spokoiny, V. 2004 Transition density estimation for stochastic differential equations via forward–reverse representations. Bernoulli 10 (2), 281312.
Milstein, G. N. & Tretyakov, M. V. 2004 Stochastic Numerics for Mathematical Physics. Springer.
Øksendal, B. 2007 Stochastic Differential Equations: An Introduction with Applications, 6th edn. Springer.
Pierrehumbert, R. T. 1991 Chaotic mixing of tracer and vorticity by modulated travelling Rossby waves. Geophys. Astrophys. Fluid Dyn. 58, 285319.
Plumb, R. A. 2002 Stratospheric transport. J. Met. Soc. Japan 80, 793809.
Proehl, J. A., Lynch, D. R., McGillicuddy, D. J. Jr & Ledwell, J. R. 2005 Modeling turbulent dispersion on the north flank of Georges Bank using Lagrangian particle methods. Cont. Shelf Res. 25, 875900.
Rodean, H. C. 1996 Stochastic Lagrangian Models of Turbulent Diffusion. American Meteorological Society.
Silverman, B. W. 1986 Density Estimation for Statistics and Data Analysis. Chapman and Hall.
Spivakovskaya, D., Heemink, A. W. & Deleersnijder, E. 2007 Lagrangian modelling of multi-dimensional advection–diffusion with space-varying diffusivities: theory and idealized test cases. Ocean Dyn. 57, 189203.
Spivakovskaya, D., Heemink, A., Milstein, G. & Schoenmakers, J. 2005 Simulation of the transport of particles in coastal waters using forward and reverse time diffusion. Adv. Water Resour. 28 (9), 927938.
Stohl, A., Forster, C., Frank, A., Seibert, P. & Wotawa, G. 2005 Technical note: the Lagrangian particle dispersion model FLEXPART version 6.2. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 5, 24612474.
Taylor, G. I. 1953 Dispersion of soluble matter in solvent flowing slowly through a tube. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 219, 186203.
Thomson, D. J. 1987 Criteria for the selection of stochastic models of particle trajectories in turbulent flows. J. Fluid Mech. 180, 529556.
Tocino, A. & Ardanuy, R. 2002 Runge–Kutta methods for numerical solution of stochastic differential equations. J. Comput. Appl. Maths 138, 219241.
Vanden-Eijnden, E. & Weare, J. 2012 Rare event simulation for small noise diffusions. Commun. Pure Appl. Maths 65, 17701803.
Wand, M. P. & Jones, M. C. 1994 Kernel Smoothing. Chapman and Hall.
Weiss, J. B. & Knobloch, E. 1989 Mass transport by modulated travelling waves. Phys. Rev. A 40, 25792589.
Weiss, J. B. & Provenzale, A. 2008 Transport and Mixing in Geophysical Flows. Springer.
Zimmermann, S., Koumoutsakos, P. & Kinzelbach, W. 2001 Simulation of pollutant transport using a particle method. J. Comput. Phys. 173 (1), 322347.
MathJax
MathJax is a JavaScript display engine for mathematics. For more information see http://www.mathjax.org.

JFM classification

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed