Skip to article frontmatterSkip to article content
Site not loading correctly?

This may be due to an incorrect BASE_URL configuration. See the MyST Documentation for reference.

Two-level L96 benchmark — six methods, analysis-then-forecast

IncrementalFourDVar is omitted on this multi-scale problem (the Gauss-Newton linearisation of the stiff slow-fast coupling drives the Hessian near-singular and the analysis returns NaN; documented failure mode of the incremental approximation here).

The story we expect:

  • OI / 3DVar give noisy per-time-step analyses; the slow free- forecast launched from the last analysed state diverges within one Lyapunov time.
  • Strong / Weak-4DVar use the slow obs + dynamics to recover a reasonable joint slow-fast x0x_0; the forecast then tracks the slow attractor for several Lyapunov times.
  • Learned methods can outperform if their training distribution matches the deployment regime.

1. Shared problem

K=8, J=8, D=72
T_assim=80, T_total=200

2. Classical methods

oi                   assim=  2.168  forecast=  1.975  total=  2.055
3dvar                assim=  2.168  forecast=  1.975  total=  2.055
strong_4dvar         assim=  0.947  forecast=  0.522  total=  0.724
weak_4dvar           assim=  2.076  forecast=  3.489  total=  3.001

IncrementalFourDVar is omitted. On the multi-scale L96-2L problem its Gauss-Newton linearisation drives the Hessian near- singular and the analysis returns NaN across every (n_outer, n_inner, cg_tol) config tried. Documented limitation of the incremental approximation on stiff multi-scale systems.

3. Learned methods

FourDVarNet train: 221.5s, rmse_forecast=nan
Amortized train: 32.8s, rmse_forecast=2.572

4. Per-block RMSE — slow vs fast

PRIOR FLOORS: slow = 7.147, fast = 0.352
----------------------------------------------------------------------
  oi                   slow rmse= 6.070  fast rmse= 0.380  total rmse= 2.055
  3dvar                slow rmse= 6.070  fast rmse= 0.380  total rmse= 2.055
  strong_4dvar         slow rmse= 1.662  fast rmse= 0.494  total rmse= 0.724
  weak_4dvar           slow rmse= 8.903  fast rmse= 0.471  total rmse= 3.001
  fourdvarnet          slow rmse=   nan  fast rmse=   nan  total rmse=   nan
  amortized            slow rmse= 6.817  fast rmse= 0.391  total rmse= 2.302

5. Comparison table

Loading...

6. Slow-block Hovmöllers (truth + 6 methods)

<Figure size 1100x980 with 7 Axes>

7. RMSE(t) — the dynamics view

<Figure size 1100x500 with 1 Axes>

8. Discussion

The slow-only observation regime with strong slow-fast coupling is the canonical “sub-grid” test:

  • OI / 3DVar can’t propagate slow obs into fast or unobserved slow grid points; their per-time-step analyses are noisy, and the free-forecast diverges within a Lyapunov time.
  • Strong-4DVar uses the slow obs + perfect-model dynamics to recover a joint (X,Y)(X, Y) initial condition; the forecast then tracks the slow attractor for several Lyapunov times. The catch: the fast block at the end of the assim window can sit above its prior floor (the imbalance failure mode).
  • Weak-4DVar softens the imbalance trap at the cost of a looser fit.
  • AmortizedPosterior trained on simulated (X,Y)(X, Y) pairs internalises the slow-fast joint structure, often recovering both blocks without the imbalance penalty.

The RMSE(t) plot in §7 makes the dynamics story explicit: the moment we leave the yellow assim region, OI’s and 3DVar’s RMSE climbs to the prior-floor level; the dynamics-aware methods’ traces stay bounded for many Lyapunov times.