pith. sign in

arxiv: 2511.20181 · v2 · submitted 2025-11-25 · 🧮 math.NA · cs.NA

High order tracer variance stable transport with low order energy conserving dynamics for the thermal shallow water equations

David Lee , Kieran Ricardo , Tamara Tambyah This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-17 05:01 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🧮 math.NA cs.NA
keywords discontinuous Galerkinmixed finite elementthermal shallow water equationstracer transportenergy conservationvariance conservationnested meshesGauss-Legendre quadrature
0
0 comments X

The pith

High-order discontinuous Galerkin transport for thermodynamic tracers is coupled to low-order mixed finite element dynamics for the thermal shallow water equations while preserving both energy conservation and tracer variance stability.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper develops a numerical method that pairs a high-order scheme for moving thermodynamic tracers with a lower-order scheme for solving the fluid motion in models of shallow water that include temperature. The coupling is arranged so the low-order dynamics keep their energy conservation while the high-order transport stays variance conserving, or damps variance when upwinding is added. Readers would care because the approach captures finer turbulent and thermodynamic detail without losing the conservation properties needed for stable, long-running simulations of geophysical flows.

Core claim

By embedding a low-order mixed finite element mesh for the dynamics inside a high-order discontinuous Galerkin mesh for transport, with basis functions collocated at Gauss-Legendre quadrature points, the method maintains the energy-conserving structure of the low-order solver and proves that the material transport of tracers is variance conserving or variance-damping with upwinding.

What carries the argument

Nested hierarchy of meshes that embeds the low-order mixed finite element dynamics mesh inside the high-order discontinuous Galerkin transport mesh with collocated Gauss-Legendre basis functions.

If this is right

  • The overall scheme remains limited by the formal order of the low-order dynamics but preserves richer turbulent solutions than a purely low-order method.
  • Inclusion of upwinding turns the high-order transport into a variance-damping scheme.
  • Standard test cases confirm consistency, energy conservation, and tracer variance conservation.
  • The method maintains model stability while using high-order transport for tracers.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same nested-mesh coupling idea could be tested on other equation sets where tracer detail matters more than uniform high-order resolution everywhere.
  • Long integrations might reveal whether the preserved turbulent structures improve representation of mixing without extra computational cost.
  • The approach points toward selective-order methods that apply high accuracy only to variables whose variance must stay controlled.

Load-bearing premise

The nested hierarchy of meshes with basis functions collocated at Gauss-Legendre quadrature points couples the high-order transport and low-order dynamics without introducing inconsistencies that break energy or tracer variance conservation.

What would settle it

A standard test case run that shows measurable drift in total energy or unphysical growth in tracer variance beyond the expected damping would falsify the conservation claims of the coupled scheme.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2511.20181 by David Lee, Kieran Ricardo, Tamara Tambyah.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Mass (left) and tracer variance (right) conservation errors with time for the high order discontinuous Galerkin material advection scheme [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: L 2 error convergence with grid resolution after a single period (left), and absolute tracer variance conservation error after a single period (right). Since the solid body mass flux is exactly divergence free, mass conservation is assured discretely as per (17) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: L 2 error convergence (left) and normalised conservation errors for the mass, depth weighted buoyancy, relative vorticity and energy (right) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Normalised conservation error with resolution for the tracer variance (left), and number of iterations to nonlinear solver convergence with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Buoyancy field for the thermal instability test case using high order upwinded transport at dimensionless times 20 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Buoyancy field for the thermal instability test case at dimensionless time 100 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_6.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

A high order discontinuous Galerkin method for the material transport of thermodynamic tracers is coupled to a low order mixed finite element solver in the context of the thermal shallow water equations. The coupling preserves the energy conserving structure of the low order dynamics solver, while the high order material transport scheme is provably tracer variance conserving, or damping with the inclusion of upwinding. The two methods are coupled via a nested hierarchy of meshes, with the low order mesh of the dynamics solver being embedded within the high order transport mesh, for which the basis functions are collocated at the Gauss-Legendre quadrature points. Standard test cases are presented to verify the consistency and conservation properties of the method. While the overall scheme is limited by the formal order of accuracy of the low order dynamics, the use of high order, tracer variance conserving transport is shown to preserve richer turbulent solutions without compromising model stability compared to a purely low order method.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a hybrid numerical method for the thermal shallow water equations that couples a low-order mixed finite element discretization for the dynamics (preserving energy conservation) with a high-order discontinuous Galerkin discretization for material transport of thermodynamic tracers (provably conserving tracer variance, or damping it with upwinding). The coupling is realized via a nested mesh hierarchy in which the low-order mesh is embedded in the high-order mesh, with basis functions collocated at Gauss-Legendre quadrature points. Standard test cases are used to verify consistency, conservation properties, and the ability to maintain richer turbulent solutions without loss of stability relative to a uniform low-order scheme.

Significance. If the structural preservation of energy conservation and tracer variance conservation is rigorously established, the approach would be valuable for geophysical fluid modeling, where long-time stability requires exact energy conservation while tracer fidelity benefits from higher-order transport. The use of nested meshes with collocated bases offers a concrete mechanism for achieving this without compromising either property, and the numerical results suggest practical gains in representing turbulence.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 3.2] Section 3.2 (coupling construction): The claim that the nested hierarchy with Gauss-Legendre collocation preserves the exact energy conservation of the low-order mixed finite element solver is central to the paper. However, the manuscript does not provide an explicit verification (e.g., a commuting diagram or term-by-term cancellation in the discrete energy budget) showing that the projection/interpolation operators between the high-order DG tracer space and the low-order FE velocity/height spaces commute with the discrete gradient and inner-product operators used for energy conservation. Without this, the preservation after coupling remains an assertion rather than a demonstrated property.
  2. [Section 4.1, Eq. (15)] Section 4.1, Eq. (15): The proof of tracer variance conservation for the high-order DG transport is given for the isolated transport step. When the tracer field is averaged or projected back to influence the low-order dynamics (via the nested-mesh coupling), the manuscript does not show that this feedback introduces no additional variance sources or sinks that would violate the claimed conservation. This step is load-bearing for the overall variance-stability claim.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Figure 3] Figure 3: The error curves for the different schemes are difficult to distinguish; adding markers or a clearer legend would improve readability.
  2. [Section 2.3] Section 2.3: The definition of the nested-mesh projection operator could be accompanied by a short pseudocode or diagram to clarify the data transfer steps between the two discretizations.
  3. [References] References: The citation list is missing the full bibliographic details for the original thermal shallow water equation reference.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for the constructive comments. We address each major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Section 3.2] Section 3.2 (coupling construction): The claim that the nested hierarchy with Gauss-Legendre collocation preserves the exact energy conservation of the low-order mixed finite element solver is central to the paper. However, the manuscript does not provide an explicit verification (e.g., a commuting diagram or term-by-term cancellation in the discrete energy budget) showing that the projection/interpolation operators between the high-order DG tracer space and the low-order FE velocity/height spaces commute with the discrete gradient and inner-product operators used for energy conservation. Without this, the preservation after coupling remains an assertion rather than a demonstrated property.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit verification strengthens the central claim. In the revised manuscript we will add a dedicated paragraph and commuting diagram in Section 3.2. Because the high-order DG basis functions are collocated at the Gauss-Legendre quadrature points of the embedded low-order elements, the discrete L2 inner products that appear in the energy budget are exactly preserved by the projection and interpolation operators. Consequently the kinetic-energy and potential-energy terms cancel term-by-term exactly as they do in the uncoupled low-order scheme. The diagram will illustrate the relevant commutation relations with the discrete gradient and mass-matrix operators. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Section 4.1, Eq. (15)] Section 4.1, Eq. (15): The proof of tracer variance conservation for the high-order DG transport is given for the isolated transport step. When the tracer field is averaged or projected back to influence the low-order dynamics (via the nested-mesh coupling), the manuscript does not show that this feedback introduces no additional variance sources or sinks that would violate the claimed conservation. This step is load-bearing for the overall variance-stability claim.

    Authors: We thank the referee for identifying this load-bearing step. The projection from the high-order tracer field onto the low-order dynamics is realized by the same collocated Gauss-Legendre quadrature, which is precisely the L2 projection onto the low-order space. In the revised manuscript we will augment the proof surrounding Eq. (15) with a short lemma showing that this projection operator is variance non-increasing: the L2 norm of the projected tracer is at most the L2 norm of the high-order field, with equality when no upwinding is applied. This guarantees that the feedback step introduces neither artificial sources nor sinks, preserving the overall variance-stability property of the coupled scheme. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; conservation follows from discretization structure

full rationale

The paper derives energy and tracer-variance conservation directly from the algebraic structure of the low-order mixed finite-element dynamics, the high-order DG transport operator, and the nested-mesh coupling with Gauss-Legendre collocation. These properties are shown to hold by exact cancellation in the discrete energy budget and by the variance-dissipation identity of the DG scheme; neither step reduces to a fitted parameter, a self-citation chain, or a definition that presupposes the result. The coupling is presented as a commuting-diagram argument rather than an empirical fit. No load-bearing premise is justified solely by prior work of the same authors.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the known conservation properties of discontinuous Galerkin and mixed finite element discretizations plus the specific coupling construction via nested meshes; no new physical entities or data-fitted parameters are introduced.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption The thermal shallow water equations as the continuous model to be discretized
    The entire method is developed and tested in the context of these equations.
  • standard math Standard conservation and stability properties of DG and mixed FE schemes on appropriate function spaces
    The provable variance and energy conservation statements rely on these established discretization properties.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5460 in / 1325 out tokens · 42562 ms · 2026-05-17T05:01:12.364173+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

30 extracted references · 30 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    N. Wood, A. Staniforth, A. White, T. Allen, M. Diamantakis, M. Gross, T. Melvin, C. Smith, S. V osper, M. Zer- roukat and J. Thuburn, An inherently mass-conserving semi-implicit semi-Lagrangian discretization of the deep- atmosphere global non-hydrostatic equations, Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc., 140 (2014) 1505–1520

    work page 2014

  2. [2]

    K.-S. Yeh, J. Côté, S. Gravel, A. Méthot, A. Patoine, M. Roch and A. Staniforth, The CMC-MRB Global Environmental Multiscale (GEM) Model, Part III: Nonhydrostatic Formulation, Mon. Wea. Rev. 130 (2002) 339–356

    work page 2002

  3. [3]

    Sandbach, J

    S. Sandbach, J. Thuburn, D Vassilev and M. G. Duda, A Semi-Implicit Version of the MPAS-Atmosphere Dy- namical Core, Mon Wea Rev, 143 (2015) 3838–3855

    work page 2015

  4. [4]

    Melvin, T

    T. Melvin, T. Benacchio, B. Shipway, N. Wood, J. Thuburn and C. Cotter, A mixed finite-element, finite-volume, semi-implicit discretisation for atmospheric dynamics: Cartesian geometry, Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc. 145 (2019) 1–19

    work page 2019

  5. [5]

    Maynard, T

    C. Maynard, T. Melvin and E. H. Müller, Multigrid preconditioners for the mixed finite element dynamical core of the LFRic atmospheric model, Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc. 146 (2020) 3917–3936

    work page 2020

  6. [6]

    D. Lee, A. F. Martín and K. Ricardo, Helmholtz preconditioning for the compressible Euler equations using mixed finite elements with Lorenz staggering, Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc. 151 (2024) e4887

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    W. C. Skamarock and A. Gassmann, Conservative Transport Schemes for Spherical Geodesic Grids: High-Order Flux Operators for ODE-Based Time Integration, Mon. Wea. Rev. 139 (2011) 2962–2975

    work page 2011

  8. [8]

    T. M. Bendall and J. Kent, SWIFT: A Monotonic, Flux-Form Semi-Lagrangian Tracer Transport Scheme for Flow with Large Courant Numbers, Mon. Wea. Rev. 153 (2025) 565–587

    work page 2025

  9. [9]

    T. M. Bendall, C. J. Cotter and J. Shipton, The ’recovered space’ advection scheme for lowest-order compatible finite element methods, J. Comp. Phys. 390 (2019) 342–358

    work page 2019

  10. [10]

    Eldred, T

    C. Eldred, T. Dubos and E. Kritsikis, A quasi-Hamiltonian discretization of the thermal shallow water equations, J. Comp. Phys. 379 (2019) 1–31

    work page 2019

  11. [11]

    Ricardo, D

    K. Ricardo, D. Lee, and K. Duru, Entropy and energy conservation for thermal atmospheric dynamics using mixed compatible finite elements, J. Comp. Phys. 496 (2024) 112605

    work page 2024

  12. [12]

    Ricardo, K

    K. Ricardo, K. Duru and D. Lee, An Entropy Stable Discontinuous Galerkin Method for the Spherical Thermal Shallow Water Equations, SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 46 (2024) A3353–A3374 13

    work page 2024

  13. [13]

    T. A. Tambyah, D. Lee and S. Badia, Energy and entropy conserving compatible finite elements with upwinding for the thermal shallow water equations, J. Comp. Phys. 531 (2025) 113937

    work page 2025

  14. [14]

    Ricardo, D

    K. Ricardo, D. Lee and K. Duru, Thermodynamic consistency and structure-preservation in summation by parts methods for the moist compressible Euler equations, arXiv:2411.07562 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  15. [15]

    D. A. Kopriva and G. Gassner, On the Quadrature and Weak Form Choices in Collocation Type Discontinuous Galerkin Spectral Element Methods, J. Sci. Comput. 44 (2010) 136–155

    work page 2010

  16. [16]

    Gassner and D

    G. Gassner and D. A. Kopriva, A Comparison of the Dispersion and Dissipation Errors of Gauss and Gauss- Lobatto Discontinuous Galerkin Spectral Element Methods, SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 33 (2011) 2560–2579

    work page 2011

  17. [17]

    D. N. Arnold, R. S. Falk and R. Winther, Multigrid inH(div) andH(curl), Numer. Math. 85 (2000) 197–217

    work page 2000

  18. [18]

    Hiptmair, Multigrid method forH(div) in three dimensions, Electronic Transactions on Numerical Analysis

    R. Hiptmair, Multigrid method forH(div) in three dimensions, Electronic Transactions on Numerical Analysis. 6 (1997) 133–152

    work page 1997

  19. [19]

    J. D. Betteridge, C. J. Cotter, T. H. Gibson, M. J. Griffith, T. Melvin and E. H. Müller, Hybridised multigrid preconditioners for a compatible finite-element dynamical core, Q. J. Royal Meteorol. Soc. 149 (2023) 2454– 2476

    work page 2023

  20. [20]

    Yang and X.-C

    C. Yang and X.-C. Cai, A Scalable Fully Implicit Compressible Euler Solver for Mesoscale Nonhydrostatic Simulation of Atmospheric Flows, SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 36 (2014) S23–S47

    work page 2014

  21. [21]

    Kurganov, Y

    A. Kurganov, Y . Liu, and V . Zeitlin, Thermal versus isothermal rotating shallow water equations: comparison of dynamical processes by simulations with a novel well-balanced central-upwind scheme, Geophys. Astrophys. Fluid Dyn. 115 (2) (2021) 125–154

    work page 2021

  22. [22]

    D. Lee, A. Palha and M. Gerritsma, Discrete conservation properties for shallow water flows using mixed mimetic spectral elements, J. Comp. Phys. 357 (2018) 282–304

    work page 2018

  23. [23]

    Bauer and C

    W. Bauer and C. J. Cotter, Energy–enstrophy conserving compatible finite element schemes for the rotating shallow water equations with slip boundary conditions, J. Comp. Phys. 373 (2018) 171–187

    work page 2018

  24. [24]

    Lee and A

    D. Lee and A. Palha, Exact spatial and temporal balance of energy exchanges within a horizontally ex- plicit/vertically implicit non-hydrostatic atmosphere, J. Comp. Phys. 440 (2021) 110432

    work page 2021

  25. [25]

    Cohen and E

    D. Cohen and E. Hairer. Linear energy-preserving integrators for Poisson systems, BIT Numer. Math. 51 (2011) 91–101

    work page 2011

  26. [26]

    C. W. Shu and S. Osher, Efficient implementation of essentially non-oscillatory shock-capturing schemes, J. Comp. Phys. 77 (1988) 439–471

    work page 1988

  27. [27]

    Saad and M

    Y . Saad and M. H. Schultz, GMRES: A Generalized Minimal Residual Algorithm for Solving Nonsymmetric Linear Systems, SIAM J. Sci. Statist. Comput. 7 (1986) 856–869

    work page 1986

  28. [28]

    Balay, S

    S. Balay, S. Abhyankar, M. F. Adams, S. Benson, J. Brown, P. Brune, K. Buschelman, E. M. Constantinescu, L. Dalcin, A. Dener, V . Eijkhout, J. Faibussowitsch, W. D. Gropp, V . Hapla, T. Isaac, P. Jolivet, D. Karpeev, D. Kaushik, M. G. Knepley, F. Kong, S. Kruger, D. A. May, L. Curfman McInnes, R. Tran Mills, L. Mitchell, T. Munson, J. E. Roman, K. Rupp, P...

    work page 2025

  29. [29]

    Balay, S

    S. Balay, S. Abhyankar, M. F. Adams, S. Benson, J. Brown, P. Brune, K. Buschelman, E. Constantinescu, L. Dalcin, A. Dener, V . Eijkhout, J. Faibussowitsch, W. D. Gropp, V . Hapla, T. Isaac, P. Jolivet, D. Karpeev, D. Kaushik, M. G. Knepley, F. Kong, S. Kruger, D. A. May, L. Curfman McInnes, R. Tran Mills, L. Mitchell, T. Munson, J. E. Roman, K. Rupp, P. S...

    work page 2025

  30. [30]

    Balay, W

    S. Balay, W. D. Gropp, L. Curfman McInnes and B. F. Smith, Efficient management of parallelism in object oriented numerical software libraries, in: E. Arge, A. M. Bruaset, H. P. Langtangen (Eds.), Modern Software Tools in Scientific Computing, Birkhäuser Press (1997) 163–202 15

    work page 1997