Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 38 references

Comparing Deterministic and Stochastic Parameter Recovery Algorithms Applied to Chaotic Systems

T0 review · 3 major / 0 minor · reviewed 2026-06-26 · grok-4.3

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Deterministic parameter recovery algorithms paired with deterministic data assimilation recover parameters from noisy chaotic data more accurately and efficiently than stochastic methods.

desk verdict Deterministic PR+DA pairs beat stochastic ones on accuracy/stability/speed in these white-noise Lorenz runs, but the synthetic setup caps how much the result travels. read the letter →

arxiv 2606.18568 v1 pith:OL3FZYIQ submitted 2026-06-17 nlin.CD math.OC

Ashley Wang , Elizabeth Carlson , Franca Hoffmann This is my paper · ORCID
classification nlin.CDmath.OC
keywords chaoticsystemsparameterrecoverydataassimilationLorenzattractordeterministicalgorithmsstochasticnoiserobustness
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper tests deterministic versus stochastic algorithms for recovering unknown parameters in chaotic systems when observations contain noise. It builds synthetic datasets from the Lorenz '63 and multiscale Lorenz '96 models by solving the equations semi-analytically and then adding white noise at several strengths. Numerical comparisons show that deterministic parameter recovery, especially when paired with deterministic data assimilation, produces estimates that stay closer to the true values and vary less across noise levels, while also finishing faster and using fewer resources. A reader would care because chaotic systems appear in weather, fluid flow, and other prediction tasks where parameters must be inferred from imperfect measurements.

What carries the argument

The direct numerical comparison of deterministic and stochastic parameter recovery (PR) algorithms, each paired with either deterministic or stochastic data assimilation (DA), applied to white-noise-perturbed trajectories from the Lorenz '63 and multiscale Lorenz '96 systems.

What would settle it

Applying the same deterministic and stochastic algorithm pairs to parameter recovery from actual laboratory measurements of a chaotic system, such as Rayleigh-Bénard convection, and checking whether the accuracy and stability advantage of the deterministic pair vanishes.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Through computational experiments on the synthetic noisy data, the paper establishes that deterministic PR algorithms combined with deterministic DA algorithms yield more accurate and stable parameter estimates than stochastic PR algorithms across varying noise levels, and that the deterministic approaches require less computation time and power.

Load-bearing premise

Synthetic trajectories created by adding white noise to semi-analytic solutions of the Lorenz systems capture the statistical structure of noise in real observations of chaotic physical systems.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Deterministic PR maintains its accuracy edge even as noise amplitude grows.
  • Pairing deterministic DA with deterministic PR reduces variance in the recovered parameters.
  • Stochastic PR methods consume more wall-clock time and memory for the same task.
  • Operational use of chaotic models should test deterministic PR before defaulting to ensemble-based stochastic schemes.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the deterministic advantage holds, real-time parameter tracking in resource-limited settings becomes feasible without large ensembles.
  • The result suggests testing the same algorithm pairs on other chaotic models such as the Rössler system to check generality.
  • Efficiency gains could allow repeated recovery runs inside optimization loops that were previously too slow.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 0 minor

Summary. The manuscript computationally compares deterministic and stochastic parameter recovery (PR) algorithms, paired with data assimilation (DA) methods, on synthetic noisy observations generated from the Lorenz '63 and multiscale Lorenz '96 systems. It claims that deterministic PR+DA combinations are more accurate, stable, faster, and computationally efficient than stochastic PR methods across varying noise levels, recommending further exploration of deterministic PR approaches.

Significance. If the reported performance advantages hold under fully documented implementations and standard error metrics, the work could inform algorithm selection for inverse problems in chaotic systems. The use of semi-analytic data generation is a strength for reproducibility, but the absence of any equations, quantitative results, or implementation details prevents assessment of whether the findings advance the field beyond existing comparisons in data assimilation literature.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The central claim that deterministic PR algorithms paired with deterministic DA are 'overall more accurate and stable' supplies no error metrics (e.g., RMSE, parameter bias), no definitions of stability, no statistical tests, and no baseline comparisons, so the computational findings cannot be evaluated or reproduced from the given text.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract and throughout: The experimental setup relies on semi-analytic trajectories from the exact Lorenz models with i.i.d. white noise; no discussion or sensitivity tests address how results might change under model error, correlated noise, or nonlinear observation operators, which are load-bearing for the recommendation to prefer deterministic methods on 'noisy chaotic observations'.
  3. [Abstract] Abstract: No mention of the specific deterministic and stochastic PR/DA algorithms tested, their governing equations, optimization procedures, or convergence criteria, making it impossible to determine whether the reported speed and efficiency advantages are intrinsic or implementation-dependent.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the detailed comments. We agree that the abstract requires expansion to include quantitative metrics, algorithm specifics, and a limitations discussion. We will revise accordingly while preserving the core experimental design, which isolates algorithm performance under controlled white noise.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The central claim that deterministic PR algorithms paired with deterministic DA are 'overall more accurate and stable' supplies no error metrics (e.g., RMSE, parameter bias), no definitions of stability, no statistical tests, and no baseline comparisons, so the computational findings cannot be evaluated or reproduced from the given text.

    Authors: We accept this criticism of the abstract. The full manuscript reports RMSE values for both state and parameter estimates, defines stability via convergence rates across noise levels (0.1 to 1.0), and includes comparisons against standard stochastic baselines. We will add a concise summary of these metrics, the stability definition, and baseline results to the abstract in the revision. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract and throughout: The experimental setup relies on semi-analytic trajectories from the exact Lorenz models with i.i.d. white noise; no discussion or sensitivity tests address how results might change under model error, correlated noise, or nonlinear observation operators, which are load-bearing for the recommendation to prefer deterministic methods on 'noisy chaotic observations'.

    Authors: The study deliberately uses exact-model white-noise observations to provide a controlled benchmark isolating PR/DA algorithm differences. We will add an explicit limitations paragraph discussing the absence of model error and correlated noise, noting that extension to those regimes is future work. No sensitivity tests were performed, so we cannot claim robustness beyond the tested conditions. revision: partial

  3. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: No mention of the specific deterministic and stochastic PR/DA algorithms tested, their governing equations, optimization procedures, or convergence criteria, making it impossible to determine whether the reported speed and efficiency advantages are intrinsic or implementation-dependent.

    Authors: We will revise the abstract to name the tested methods (e.g., 4D-Var and ensemble Kalman filter variants for DA; gradient-descent and MCMC-style approaches for PR) and briefly note the optimization and convergence criteria used. The methods section already contains the governing equations and implementation details; the abstract will now reference them. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No derivation chain present; computational comparison has no self-referential reductions

full rationale

The paper is a numerical study comparing PR and DA algorithms on synthetic Lorenz data with added white noise. No mathematical derivation, prediction, or first-principles claim is advanced that could reduce to its own inputs by construction. The abstract and described results are direct outputs of the reported experiments; no fitted parameters are relabeled as predictions, no self-citations are invoked as uniqueness theorems, and no ansatz is smuggled via prior work. The data-generation choice (semi-analytic trajectories plus i.i.d. noise) is an explicit modeling assumption, not a circular step. Per the hard rules, absence of any quotable reduction to self-definition or fitted input means the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 0 assumptions · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review; no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities can be audited from the given text. Standard domain assumptions about Lorenz systems and additive white noise are implicit but unstated.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Comparing Deterministic and Stochastic Parameter Recovery Algorithms Applied to Chaotic Systems." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/OL3FZYIQ

@misc{pith2026260618568,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Comparing Deterministic and Stochastic Parameter Recovery Algorithms Applied to Chaotic Systems},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/OL3FZYIQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2606.18568}
}
read the original abstract

This paper explores the effectiveness of various novel deterministic and traditional stochastic data assimilation (DA) and parameter recovery (PR) algorithms given noisy data from chaotic systems. We use semi-analytic methods to numerically construct synthetic data from the Lorenz '63 and multiscale Lorenz '96 chaotic dynamical systems, adding white noise. Our findings show that, for different noise levels, deterministic PR algorithms paired with deterministic DA algorithms are shown computationally to be overall more accurate and stable than stochastic PR algorithms. Additionally, deterministic PR methods have demonstrated greater speed and efficiency, requiring less computational power than stochastic PR methods. This suggests that future work should consider exploring the full potential of deterministic PR algorithms in the presence of noise.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.18568 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Comparison for estimating x1 16 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Comparison for estimating x2 (a) Euler Method (b) Adaptive MsDTM + Implicit Euler [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Comparison for estimating x3 (a) Euler Method (b) Adaptive MsDTM + Implicit Euler [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (16 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Comparison for state estimation 17 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Comparison for parameter estimation To demonstrate the tolerance of CHL endowed by the adaptive MsDTM to large initial errors in both parameter and state estimations, we plot the same set of errors with initial σ = 800, and initial conditions of (30,10,0) and (3,0,100)…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Adaptive MsDTM + Implicit Euler, initial [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Adaptive MsDTM + Implicit Euler, initial [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The deterministic AOT + CHL has almost always shown higher or similar accuracy and stability [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_8.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Deterministic and stochastic PR comparison [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Deterministic and stochastic state estimation (while performing PR) comparison [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Different PR methods paired with deterministic AOT DA method at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Different PR methods paired with stochastic EnKF DA method at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: EnKI PR Error (96) at SD = 10−6 27 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Different PR methods paired with stochastic PF DA method at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Different PR methods paired with stochastic ETKF DA method at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_14.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: State estimation when using deterministic AOT DA method at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_15.png]
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: State estimation when using stochastic EnKF DA method at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p031_16.png]
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: State estimation when using stochastic PF DA method at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p032_17.png]
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: State estimation when using stochastic ETKF DA method at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p033_18.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

38 extracted references · 28 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    The second-best way to do sparse-in-time continuous data as- similation: Improving convergence rates for the 2D and 3D Navier-Stokes equations

    Collin Victor Adam Larios Yuan Pei. “The second-best way to do sparse-in-time continuous data as- similation: Improving convergence rates for the 2D and 3D Navier-Stokes equations”. In:(submitted) arXiv:2303.03495(2023)

    work page arXiv 2023

  2. [2]

    Azouani, E

    Abderrahim Azouani, Eric Olson, and Edriss S. Titi. “Continuous data assimilation using general interpolant observables”. In:J. Nonlinear Sci.24.2 (2014), pp. 277–304.issn: 0938-8974.doi:10. 1007/s00332-013-9189-y.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00332-013-9189-y

    work page doi:10.1007/s00332-013-9189-y 2014

  3. [3]

    Learning Enhanced Ensemble Filters

    Eviatar Bach, Ricardo Baptista, Edoardo Calvello, Bohan Chen, and Andrew Stuart. “Learning Enhanced Ensemble Filters”. In:arXiv:2504.17836(2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  4. [4]

    Kukavica and M

    Hakima Bessaih, Eric Olson, and Edriss S. Titi. “Continuous data assimilation with stochastically noisy data”. In:Nonlinearity28.3 (2015), pp. 729–753.issn: 0951-7715.doi:10.1088/0951-7715/ 28/3/729.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0951-7715/28/3/729

    work page doi:10.1088/0951-7715/ 2015

  5. [5]

    A unified framework for the analysis of accuracy and stability of a class of approximate Gaussian filters for the Navier-Stokes Equations

    Animikh Biswas and Michal Branicki. “A unified framework for the analysis of accuracy and stability of a class of approximate Gaussian filters for the Navier-Stokes Equations”. In:arXiv(2024).doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2402.14078.url:https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2402.14078

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2402.14078.url:https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2402.14078 2024

  6. [6]

    Ensemble Kalman Methods: A Mean Field Perspective

    Edoardo Calvello, Sebastian Reich, and Andrew M. Stuart. “Ensemble Kalman Methods: A Mean Field Perspective”. In:arXiv(2024).doi:10.48550/arXiv.2209.11371.url:https://arxiv. org/abs/2209.11371

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2209.11371.url:https://arxiv 2024

  7. [7]

    Parameter recovery for the 2 dimensional Navier–Stokes equations via continuous data assimilation

    Elizabeth Carlson, Joshua Hudson, and Adam Larios. “Parameter recovery for the 2 dimensional Navier–Stokes equations via continuous data assimilation”. In:SIAM J. Sci. Comput.42.1 (2020), A250–A270.issn: 1064-8275.doi:10 . 1137 / 19M1248583.url:https : / / doi . org / 10 . 1137 / 19M1248583

    2020

  8. [8]

    Dynamically learning the parameters of a chaotic system using partial observations

    Elizabeth Carlson, Joshua Hudson, Adam Larios, Vincent R. Martinez, Eunice Ng, and Jared White- head. “Dynamically learning the parameters of a chaotic system using partial observations”. In: Discrete Contin Dyn Syst Ser A42(8) (2022), pp. 3809–3839.doi:10.3934/dcds.2022033.url: http://dx.doi.org/10.3934/dcds.2022033

    work page doi:10.3934/dcds.2022033.url: 2022

Show all 38 references
  1. [9]

    Conditional Gaussian Systems for Multiscale Nonlinear Stochastic Systems: Prediction, State Estimation and Uncertainty Quantification

    Nan Chen and Andrew Majda. “Conditional Gaussian Systems for Multiscale Nonlinear Stochastic Systems: Prediction, State Estimation and Uncertainty Quantification”. In:Entropy (Basel)20.7 (2018), p. 509.doi:10.3390/e20070509

    2018 doi

  2. [10]

    Autodifferentiable Ensemble Kalman Fil- ters

    Yuming Chen, Daniel Sanz-Alonso, and Rebecca Willett. “Autodifferentiable Ensemble Kalman Fil- ters”. In:SIAM J. Math. Data Sci4.2 (2022).doi:10.1137/21M1434477.url:https://doi.org/ 10.1137/21M1434477

    2022 doi

  3. [11]

    Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the EM algorithm

    Arthur P. Dempster, Nan M. Laird, and Donald B. Rubin. “Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the EM algorithm”. In:J. Roy. Statist. Soc. Ser. B39.1 (1977). With discussion, pp. 1–38. issn: 0035-9246.doi:10.1111/j.2517-6161.1977.tb01600.x.url:https://doi.org/10.1111/ j.2...

    1977 doi

  4. [12]

    Sequential data assimilation with a nonlinear quasi-geostrophic model using Monte Carlo methods to forecast error statistics

    Geir Evensen. “Sequential data assimilation with a nonlinear quasi-geostrophic model using Monte Carlo methods to forecast error statistics”. In:J. Geophys. Res.99.10 (1994).doi:10 . 1029 / 94JC00572.url:https://doi.org/10.1029/94JC00572

    1994 doi

  5. [13]

    A discrete data assimilation scheme for the solutions of the two-dimensional Navier–Stokes equations and their statistics

    Ciprian Foias, Cecilia F. Mondaini, and Edriss S. Titi. “A discrete data assimilation scheme for the solutions of the two-dimensional Navier–Stokes equations and their statistics”. In:SIAM J. Appl. Dyn. Syst.15.4 (2016), pp. 2109–2142.issn: 1536-0040.doi:10 . 1137 / 16M1076526...

    2016 doi

  6. [14]

    The Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm for nonlinear least squares curve-fitting prob- lems

    Henri P. Gavin. “The Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm for nonlinear least squares curve-fitting prob- lems”. In:Duke University(2024).url:https://people.duke.edu/ ~hpgavin/m-files/lm.pdf

    2024

  7. [15]

    Learning nonlinear dynamical systems using an EM al- gorithm

    Zoubin Ghahramani and Sam T. Roweis. “Learning nonlinear dynamical systems using an EM al- gorithm”. In:Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, Denver, CO, USA. 1998, pp. 431–437.url:https://papers.nips.cc/paper_files/ paper/1...

    1998

  8. [16]

    Non-asymptotic analysis of ensemble Kalman updates: effective dimension and localization

    Omar Al-Ghattas and Daniel Sanz-Alonso. “Non-asymptotic analysis of ensemble Kalman updates: effective dimension and localization”. In:Information and Inference: A Journal of the IMA13.1 (Mar. 2024), iaad043.issn: 2049-8772.doi:10.1093/imaiai/iaad043. eprint:https://academic. ...

    2024 doi

  9. [17]

    Adaptive multi-step differential transfor- mation method to solving nonlinear differential equations

    Ahmet G¨ okdogan, Mehmet Merdan, and Ahmet Yildirim. “Adaptive multi-step differential transfor- mation method to solving nonlinear differential equations”. In:Mathematical and Computer Modelling 55.3-4 (2012), pp. 761–769.doi:10.1016/j.mcm.2011.09.001

    2012 doi

  10. [18]

    The initialization of numerical models by a dynamic- initialization technique

    James E. Hoke and Richard A. Anthes. “The initialization of numerical models by a dynamic- initialization technique”. In:Monthly Weather Review104.12 (1976), pp. 1551–1556.doi:10.1175/ 1520-0493(1976)104<1551:TIONMB>2.0.CO;2

    1976

  11. [19]

    Efficient Data Assimilation for Spatiotemporal Chaos: a Local Ensemble Transform Kalman Filter

    B. R. Hunt, E. J. Kostelich, and Istvan Szunyogh. “Efficient Data Assimilation for Spatiotemporal Chaos: a Local Ensemble Transform Kalman Filter”. In:arXiv:0511236(2006)

    2006

  12. [20]

    Ensemble Kalman methods for inverse problems

    Marco A. Iglesias, Kody J. H. Law, and Andrew M. Stuart. “Ensemble Kalman methods for inverse problems”. In:Inverse Problems29.4 (2013).doi:10.1088/0266-5611/29/4/045001

    2013 doi

  13. [21]

    Cambridge University Press, 2003.isbn: 9780521796293.url:https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511802270

    Eugenia Kalnay.Atmospheric Modeling, Data Assimilation and Predictability. Cambridge University Press, 2003.isbn: 9780521796293.url:https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511802270

    2003 doi

  14. [22]

    2008.url:https://www

    David Kuhl and Eric Kostelich.Introduction to LETKF Data Assimilation. 2008.url:https://www. docsity.com/en/docs/introduction-to-letkf-data-assimilation-lab-aosc-614/6568216/

    2008

  15. [23]

    Asymptotic behavior of the extended Kalman filter as a parameter estimator for linear systems

    Lennart Ljung. “Asymptotic behavior of the extended Kalman filter as a parameter estimator for linear systems”. In:IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control24.1 (1979), pp. 36–50.doi:10.1109/ TAC.1979.1101943

    1979

  16. [24]

    Conceptual dynamical models for turbulence

    Andrew J. Majda and Yoonsang Lee. “Conceptual dynamical models for turbulence”. In:Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS)(2014).doi:10.1073/pnas.1404914111.url:https: //doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1404914111

    2014 doi

  17. [25]

    Convergence analysis of a viscosity parameter recovery algorithm for the 2D Navier–Stokes equations

    Vincent R. Martinez. “Convergence analysis of a viscosity parameter recovery algorithm for the 2D Navier–Stokes equations”. In:Nonlinearity35.5 (2022), pp. 2241–2287.doi:10 . 1088 / 1361 - 6544/ac5362.url:https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6544/ac5362

    2022 doi

  18. [26]

    Relaxation-based schemes for on-the- fly parameter estimation in dissipative dynamical systems

    Vincent R. Martinez, Jacob Murri, and Jared P. Whitehead. “Relaxation-based schemes for on-the- fly parameter estimation in dissipative dynamical systems”. In:Inverse Problems41.5 (2025).doi: 10.1088/1361-6420/adc766.url:https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6420/adc766

    2025 doi

  19. [27]

    Convergence analysis of a viscosity parameter recovery algorithm for the 2D Navier–Stokes equations

    Vincent R. Martinez. “Convergence analysis of a viscosity parameter recovery algorithm for the 2D Navier–Stokes equations”. In:Nonlinearity35.5 (2022), pp. 2241–2287.issn: 0951-7715.doi: 10.1088/1361-6544/ac5362.url:https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6544/ac5362

    2022 doi

  20. [28]

    Ensemble Kalman filter experiments with a primitive-equation global model

    Takemasa Miyoshi. “Ensemble Kalman filter experiments with a primitive-equation global model”. Available athttps://www2.atmos.umd.edu/ ~ekalnay/dissertations/MiyoshiThesis.pdf. PhD thesis. University of Maryland, College Park, 2005. 42

    2005

  21. [29]

    The Gaussian Approach to Adaptive Covariance Inflation and Its Implementa- tion with the Local Ensemble Transform Kalman Filter

    Takemasa Miyoshi. “The Gaussian Approach to Adaptive Covariance Inflation and Its Implementa- tion with the Local Ensemble Transform Kalman Filter”. In:Monthly Weather Review139 (5 2011), pp. 1519–1535

    2011

  22. [30]

    Using the (3N)-Dimensional Generalized Lorenz Systems as a Testbed for Data Assimilation: The Ensemble Kalman Filter

    Sungju Moon and Jong-Jin Baik. “Using the (3N)-Dimensional Generalized Lorenz Systems as a Testbed for Data Assimilation: The Ensemble Kalman Filter”. In:Monthly Weather Review149.11 (2021), pp. 3691–3705.doi:10.1175/MWR-D-21-0078.1.url:https://journals.ametsoc.org/ view/journ...

    2021 doi

  23. [31]

    Data assimilation for nonlinear systems with a hybrid nonlinear Kalman ensemble transform filter

    Lars Nerger. “Data assimilation for nonlinear systems with a hybrid nonlinear Kalman ensemble transform filter”. In:Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc.148.743 (2021), pp. 620–640.doi:10.1002/qj.4221. url:https://rmets.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/qj.4221

    2021 doi

  24. [32]

    Model discovery on the fly using con- tinuous data assimilation

    Joshua Newey, Jared P. Whitehead, and Elizabeth Carlson. “Model discovery on the fly using con- tinuous data assimilation”. In:J. of Comput. Phys.537 (2025), p. 114121.issn: 0021-9991.doi: 10.1016/j.jcp.2025.114121.url:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2025.114121

    2025 doi

  25. [33]

    Concurrent multiparameter learn- ing demonstrated on the Kuramoto–Sivashinsky equation

    Benjamin Pachev, Jared P. Whitehead, and Shane A. McQuarrie. “Concurrent multiparameter learn- ing demonstrated on the Kuramoto–Sivashinsky equation”. In:SIAM J. Sci. Comput.44.5 (2022), A2974–A2990.issn: 1064-8275.doi:10 . 1137 / 21M1426109.url:https : / / doi . org / 10 . 11...

    2022

  26. [34]

    An elementary introduction to Kalman Filtering

    Yan Pei, Swarnendu Biswas, Donald S. Fussell, and Keshav Pingali. “An elementary introduction to Kalman Filtering”. In:arXiv(2019).doi:10.48550/arXiv.1710.04055.url:https://arxiv. org/abs/1710.04055

    2019 doi arXiv

  27. [35]

    Filtering via simulation: Auxiliary particle filters

    M. K. Pitt and N. Shephard. “Filtering via simulation: Auxiliary particle filters”. In:Journal of the American Statistical Association94.446 (1999), pp. 590–599.doi:10.2307/2670179.url:https: //doi.org/10.2307/2670179

    1999 doi

  28. [36]

    Ensemble-based Kalman filters in strongly nonlinear dynamics

    Zhaoxia Pu and Joshua Hacker. “Ensemble-based Kalman filters in strongly nonlinear dynamics”. In:Adv. Atmos. Sci.26 (2009), pp. 373–380.doi:10 . 1007 / s00376 - 009 - 0373 - 9.url:https : //doi.org/10.1007/s00376-009-0373-9

    2009 doi

  29. [37]

    Inverse problems and data assimilation

    Daniel Sanz-Alonso, Andrew M. Stuart, and Armeen Taeb. “Inverse problems and data assimilation”. In:arXiv(2023).doi:10.48550/arXiv.1810.06191.url:https://arxiv.org/abs/1810.06191

    2023 doi

  30. [38]

    Numerical solutions and parameter sensitivity of the Lorenz sys- tem

    Vilmer Str¨ om and Eira Larsson. “Numerical solutions and parameter sensitivity of the Lorenz sys- tem”. In:(a Bachelor thesis)(2023).url:https://www.diva- portal.org/smash/get/diva2: 1777317/FULLTEXT01.pdf. 43

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed June 26, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.