the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Sweep Interpolation: A Fourth-Order Accurate Cost Effective Scheme in the Global Environmental Multiscale Model
Mohammad Mortezazadeh
Jean-Francois Cossette
Ashu Dastoor
Jean de Grandpré
Irena Ivanova
Abdessamad Qaddouri
Abstract. The interpolation process is the most computationally expensive step of the semi-Lagrangian (SL) approach for solving advection which is commonly used in numerical weather prediction (NWP) models. It has a significant impact on the accuracy of the solution and can potentially be the most expensive part of model integration. The sweep algorithm, which was first described by Mortezazadeh and Wang (2017), performs SL interpolation with the same computational cost as a third order polynomial scheme but with the accuracy of a fourth order interpolation scheme. This improvement is achieved by using two 3rd-order backward and forward polynomial interpolation schemes in two consecutive time steps. In this paper, we present a new application of the sweep algorithm within the context of global forecasts produced with Environment Climate Change Canada’s Global Environmental Multiscale (GEM) model. Results show that the sweep interpolation scheme is computationally more efficient compared to a conventional fourth order polynomial scheme, especially evident for increasing number of several advected several passive tracers. An additional advantage of this new approach is that its implementation in a chemical and weather forecast models requires minimum modifications of the interpolation weighting coefficients. An analysis of the computational performance for a set of theoretical benchmarks as well as a global ozone forecast experiment show that up to 15 % reduction in total wall clock time is achieved. Forecasting experiments using the global version of the GEM model and the new interpolation show that the sweep interpolation can perform very well in predicting ozone distribution, especially in the tropopause region where transport processes play a significant role.
- Preprint
(1981 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Mohammad Mortezazadeh et al.
Status: open (until 22 Oct 2023)
-
CC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-1508', Jixiang Li, 21 Sep 2023
reply
Thank you for sharing your research. This paper presents a fourth-order accurate and cost-effective scheme called sweep interpolation, which uses fewer neighboring cells than the cubic interpolation. It significantly reduces computational time while maintaining very close accuracy to the typical fourth-order interpolation. However, there are still some issues that need to be addressed before it can be accepted for publication in GMD.
(1) Different interpolation schemes should have different contents. Please compare the differences in contour maps between CUBIC and SWEEP interpolations in Figure 3, Figure 4, and Figure 5.
(2) In the atmospheric methane-like tracer test case, the differences between cubic and sweep interpolations are apparent (Figure 5b), and the reasons for these differences should be analyzed.
(3) Serial numbers are not marked in Figures 4 and 5.
(4) Place all the pictures on one page in Figures 4 and 6.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1508-CC1 -
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-1508', Li Dong, 26 Sep 2023
reply
General comments:
This manuscript describes the application of the sweep interpolation with fourth-order accuracy in the GEM. As we all know, the interpolation algorithm for the velocity and tracer densities is vital for the semi-Lagrangian method. The authors proposed an elaborate idea of combining two interpolation stencils to cancel the leading errors. The sweep algorithm is efficient as the third-order one but with higher accuracy as the fourth-order one, and it is easy to implement. The numerical experiment results illustrate the efficacy of the sweep interpolation algorithm. I recommend the publication of this manuscript subject to a minor revision.
Specific comments:
It would be better that some details can be further explained:
- In 2D, there are four possible stencil combinations as shown in Fig. 1 of Mortezazadeh and Wang (2017). Is the selection of forward and backward interpolation stencils related to the parcel characteristic line? Or if the two stencils change according to the backward trajectory?
- The description of the tests is too brief, such as sec. 3.1. Please add more information, such as what the spatial resolution is?
- Why the total mass of sweep scheme is decreasing, while cubic scheme is increasing in Fig. 5.
Technical corrections:
L77: The variable staggering in the vertical direction is the Charney-Phillips grid, so it should not be the Arackawa-C grid in the vertical direction.
L83: “sub grids” to “subgrids”
L116: “ ,on 1D” to “, along the 1D direction”?
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1508-RC1
Mohammad Mortezazadeh et al.
Mohammad Mortezazadeh et al.
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
164 | 45 | 9 | 218 | 3 | 3 |
- HTML: 164
- PDF: 45
- XML: 9
- Total: 218
- BibTeX: 3
- EndNote: 3
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1