2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.advwatres.2015.12.021
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Shock capturing data assimilation algorithm for 1D shallow water equations

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The adjoint system (12) must be solved backwards in time from t = T tot = 0 to find the gradient which is defined in terms of its solution evaluated at t = 0, cf. (11). For convenience, we introduce the backwards time variable τ = T − t and define vectors…”
Section: Analytic Solution Of the Data Assimilation Problem In The LImentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The adjoint system (12) must be solved backwards in time from t = T tot = 0 to find the gradient which is defined in terms of its solution evaluated at t = 0, cf. (11). For convenience, we introduce the backwards time variable τ = T − t and define vectors…”
Section: Analytic Solution Of the Data Assimilation Problem In The LImentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This approach, often referred to as "4D-VAR", has received much attention in the literature [5], particularly for applications to operational weather forecasting [6] and climate modelling. Given the ubiquity of the SWE as a model in Earth sciences, variational data assimilation approaches for this system have already received significant attention [7,8,9,10,11].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the numerical computations, we apply finite-element approximation spaces based on rectangular elements, and we opt to approximate the error in (40) by u h/2 − u h , where u h/2 is an approximation obtained from a Galerkin approximation in a finite-element space V h/2 0 in which each element is uniformly divided into 4 elements; see Figure 2. The refined finite-element space V h/2 0 moreover serves to construct an approximation to the dual solution in (40). In summary, considering an approximation u h ∈ V h 0 and a refined approximation u h/2 ∈ V h/2 0 , the worst-case multi-objective error estimate pertaining to u h is r(u h ), z h/2 with z h/2 according to Figure 1 plots the worst-case multi-objective error estimate, r(u h ), z h/2 , versus the dimension of the finite-element approximation space, dim V h 0 , for finite-element approximations with polynomial degrees p ∈ {1, 2, 3, 4} on uniform meshes with mesh width h = 2 −2 , 2 −3 , .…”
Section: Worst-case Multi-objective Error Estimation Without Data Incmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This technique applies to general linear operators with non-trivial null-spaces and possibly non-closed ranges, and it is based on an extension of Young-Fenchel duality to closed unbounded linear operators [50,48]. It is noteworthy that this technique for estimating a linear functional of a solution of an operator equation, which we consider in this paper in the context of worst-case multi-objective error estimation, yields a natural generalization of adaptive-state-estimation or so-called dataassimilation procedures (such as online sequential filters [40,51,39] or offline variational approaches [18]) to a wide class of linear and nonlinear partial differential equations, enabling incorporation of a-posteriori knowledge (for instance, sensor readings) into the error estimate rendering it less conservative [51,49].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Modeling of flood events are usually considered as boundary value problem, with boundary conditions often described by a time changing water level (hydrograph), guiding the overflow across the domain (Tirupathi et al, 2016). The ability to update the model state through time with real time data is changing our vision of flood prediction and the way we forecast the flood evolution in time and space.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%