Constraining a numerical geodynamo model with 100 years of surface observations

Geophysical Journal International

Volumn 179, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 1458-1468

  Kuang, Weijia ^a   Tangborn, Andrew ^b   Wei, Zigang ^b   Sabaka, Terence ^a  

^a NASA GODDARD SPACE FLIGHT CENTER   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE COUNTY   (United States)

Author keywords

Core, outer core and inner core; Dynomo: theories and simulations; Inverse theory; Magnetic anomalies: modelling and interpretation; Numerical solutions

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DATA ASSIMILATION; GEODYNAMO; GEOMAGNETISM; INNER CORE; INVERSE PROBLEM; MAGNETIC ANOMALY; NUMERICAL METHOD; NUMERICAL MODEL; OUTER CORE; THEORETICAL STUDY;

EID: 70450199424     PISSN: 0956540X     EISSN: 1365246X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-246X.2009.04376.x     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Andersson E. Hydrological cycle in the ECMWF forecasting system. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 2005, 86:387-402.
2. Berry PJ, Marshall JC. Ocean studies in support of altimetry. Dyn. Atmos. Oceans. 1989, 13:269-300.
3. Bloxham J, Jackson A. Fluid flow near the surface of Earth's outer core. Rev. Geophys. 1991, 29:97-120.
4. Braginsky SI. Magnetic waves in the Earth's core. Geomag. Aeron. 1967, 7:851-859.
5. Braginsky SI. Torsional magnetohydrodynamic vibrations in the Earth's core and variations in day length. Geomag. Aeron. 1976, 10:1-8.
6. Bunge H-P, Hagelberg CR, Travis BJ. Mantle circulation models with variational data assimilation: inferring past mantle flow and structure from plate motion histories and seismic tomography. Geophys. J. Int. 2003, 152:280-301.
7. Christensen UR, Aubert J. Scaling properties of convection-driven dynamos in rotating spherical shells and application to planetary magnetic fields. Geophys. J. Int. 2006, 166:97-114.
8. Christensen UR. A numerical dynamo benchmark. Phys. Earth planet. Inter. 2001, 128:25-34.
9. Cohn SE. An introduction to estimation theory. J. Meteorol. Soc. Japan 1997, 75:257-288.
10. Constable CG, Johnson CL, Lund SP. Global magnetic field models for the past 3000 years: transient or permanent flux lobes?. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond., A 2000, 358:991-1008.
11. Courant R, Friedrichs K, Lewvy H. Uber die partiellen differenzengleichungen der mathematischen physik. Mathematische Annalen 1928, 100:32-74.
12. Dee DP, Da Silva AM. The choice of variable for the atmospheric moisture analysis. Mon. Wea. Rev. 2003, 131:155-171.
13. Dumberry M, Bloxham J. Torque balance, Taylor's constraint and torsional oscillations in a numerical model of the geodynamo. Phys. Earth planet. Inter. 2003, 140:29-51.
14. Evensen G. Sequential data assimilation with a nonlinear quasi-geostrophic model using Monte-Carlo methods to forecast error statistics. J. geophys. Res. 1994, 99:10 143-10 162.
15. Fournier A, Eymin C, Alboussiere T. A case for variational geomagnetic data assimilation: insights from a one-dimensional, nonlinear and sparsely observed MHD system. Nonlin. Proc. Geophys. 2007, 14:163-180.
16. Ghil M, Malanotte-Rizzoli P. Data assimilation in meteorology and oceanography. Adv. Geophys. 1991, 33:141-226.
17. Glatzmaier GA, Roberts PH. A three-dimensional self-consistent computer simulation of a geomagnetic field reversal. Nature 1995, 377:203-209.
18. Hulot G, Eymin C, Langlais B, Mandea M, Olsen N. Small-scale structure of the Geodynamo inferred from Oersted and Magsat satellite data. Nature 2002, 416:620-623.
19. Jackson A, Jonkers ART, Walker MR. Four centuries of geomagnetic secular variation from historical records. R. Soc. Lond. A 2000, 358:957-990.
20. Jiang W, Kuang W, Chao BF, Fang M, Cox C, Tregoning P, Rizos C. Understanding time-variable gravity due to core dynamical processes with numerical geodynamo modeling. Dynamic Planet 2007, 473-479. IAG 130, eds, pp, Springer, Berlin
21. Kageyama A, Sato T. Generation mechanism of a dipole field by a magnetohydrodynamical dynamo. Phys. Rev. E 1997, 55:4617-4626.
22. Kono M, Roberts PH. Recent geodynamo simulations and observations of the geomagnetic field. Rev. Geophys. 2002, 40:1-53.
23. Korte M, Constable CG. The geomagnetic dipole moment over the last 7000 years-new results from a global model. Earth planet. Sci. Lett. 2005, 236:348-358.
24. Kuang W. Force balances and convective state in the Earth's core. Phys. Earth planet. Inter. 1999, 116:65-79.
25. Kuang W, Bloxham J. An Earth-like numerical dynamo model. Nature 1997, 389:371-374.
26. Kuang W, Bloxham J. Numerical modeling of magnetohydrodynamic convection in a rapidly rotating spherical shell: weak and strong field dynamo action. J. Comp. Phys. 1999, 153:51-81.
27. Kuang W, Chao BF. Topographic core-mantle coupling in geodynamo modeling. Geophys. Res. Lett. 2001, 28:1871-1894.
28. Kuang W, Chao BF. Geodynamo modeling and core-mantle interaction. The Core-Mantle Boundary Region 2003, Vol. 31:193-212. in, pp, eds, Dehandt et al. Geodynamics Series AGU, Washington, DC
29. Kuang W, Tangborn A, Jiang W, Liu D, Sun Z, Bloxham J, Wei Z. MoSST-DAS: the first generation geomagnetic data assimilation framework. Comm. Comp. Phys. 2008, 3:85-108.
30. Langel RA, Estes RH. A geomagnetic field spectrum. Geophy. Res. Lett. 1982, 9:250-253.
31. Larmor J. How could a rotating body such as the Sun become a magnet. Rep. Brit. Assn. Advan. Sci. 1919, 159-160.
32. Liu D, Tangborn A, Kuang W. Observing system simulation experiments in geomagnetic data assimilation. J. geophys. Res. 2007, 112:B08103. doi
33. Olson P, Christensen UR. Dipole moment scaling for convection-driven planetary dynamos. Earth planet. Sci. Lett. 2006, 250:561-571.
34. Sabaka TJ, Olson N, Langel RA. A comprehensive model of the quiet-time near-Earth magnetic field: phase 3. Geophys. J. Int. 2002, 151:32-68.
35. Simmons AJ, Hollingsworth A. Som aspects of the improvement in skill of numerical weather prediction. Q. J. R. Met. Soc. 2002, 128:647-677.
36. Stacey FD. Physics of the Earth 1992, Brookfield Press, Brisbane
37. Sun Z. Geomagnetic data assimilation using ensemble methods to estimate forecast error covariances. 2007, PhD thesis, University of Maryland Baltimore County, Baltimore
38. Sun Z, Tangborn A, Kuang W. Data assimilation in a sparsley observed modeled one-dimensional MHD system. Nonlin. Proc. Geophys. 2007, 14:181-192.
39. Talagrand O. Assimilation of observations: an introduction. J. Meteorol. Soc. Japan 1997, 75:191-209.