Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35280324›Full record

ArticleComputational geosciences2022

A comparison of nonlinear extensions to the ensemble Kalman filter: Gaussian anamorphosis and two-step ensemble filters.

Ian Grooms

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Computational geosciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Ian GroomsDepartment of Applied Mathematics, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4678-7203

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ensemble Kalman filters are based on a Gaussian assumption, which can limit their performance in some non-Gaussian settings. This paper reviews two nonlinear, non-Gaussian extensions of the Ensemble Kalman Filter: Gaussian anamorphosis (GA) methods and two-step updates, of which the rank histogram filter (RHF) is a prototypical example. GA-EnKF methods apply univariate transforms to the state and observation variables to make their distribution more Gaussian before applying an EnKF. The two-step methods use a scalar Bayesian update for the first step, followed by linear regression for the second step. The connection of the two-step framework to the full Bayesian problem is made, which opens the door to more advanced two-step methods in the full Bayesian setting. A new method for the first part of the two-step framework is proposed, with a similar form to the RHF but a different motivation, called the 'improved RHF' (iRHF). A suite of experiments with the Lorenz-'96 model demonstrate situations where the GA-EnKF methods are similar to EnKF, and where they outperform EnKF. The experiments also strongly support the accuracy of the RHF and iRHF filters for nonlinear and non-Gaussian observations; these methods uniformly beat the EnKF and GA-EnKF methods in the experiments reported here. The new iRHF method is only more accurate than RHF at small ensemble sizes in the experiments reported here.

Indexed as

Data assimilationEnsemble Kalman filterGaussian anamorphosisRank histogram filter

Identifiers

PMID35280324
PMCPMC8897550

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.