README
1Test Case for the inverse methods
2
3I) the control inverse method: Adjoint_Beta.sif Adjoint_Mu.sif
4(cf Morlighem et al., Spatial patterns of basal drag inferred using control methods
5 from a full‐Stokes and simpler models for Pine Island Glacier, West Antarctica, Geophys. Res. Lett., 37, 2010
6 Petra et al., An inexact Gauss–Newton method for inversion of basal sliding
7 and rheology parameters in a nonlinear Stokes ice sheet model, J. Glaciol., 58(211), 2012)
8
9II) the Robin Inverse Method: Robin_Beta.sif
10(cf Arthern and Gudmundsson, Initialization of ice-sheet forecasts viewed as an inverse Robin problem, J. Glaciol., 56(197), 2010)
11
12
13-----------------------
14
15The setup is based on Mac Ayeal, D.,"A tutorial on the use of control methods in ice-sheet modeling", J. Glaciol., 39(131), 1993
16
17Synthetic data (for U and V surface velocity, bedrock elevation and surface elevation) used as "perfect" observations are stored under the Data directory and have been generated previously using a slip coefficient defined by
18$ function betaSquare(tx) {\
19 Lx = 200.0e3;\
20 Ly = 50.0e03;\
21 yearinsec = 365.25*24*60*60;\
22 F1=sin(3.0*pi*tx(0)/Lx)*sin(pi*tx(1)/Ly);\
23 F2=sin(pi*tx(0)/(2.0*Lx))*cos(4.0*pi*tx(1)/Ly);\
24 beta=5.0e3*F1+5.0e03*F2;\
25 _betaSquare=beta*beta/(1.0e06*yearinsec);\
26}
27and a viscosity defined by
28$ function MuSquare(tx) {\
29 Lx = 200.0e3;\
30 Ly = 50.0e03;\
31 yearinsec = 365.25*24*60*60;\
32 F1=sin(3.0*pi*tx(0)/Lx)*sin(pi*tx(1)/Ly);\
33 F2=sin(pi*tx(0)/(2.0*Lx))*cos(4.0*pi*tx(1)/Ly);\
34 mu=sqrt(1.8e08)+1.0e03*(F1+F2);\
35 _MuSquare=mu*mu*1.0e-6*(2.0*yearinsec)^(-1.0/3.0);\
36}
37
38
39
40-----------------------
41TO RUN the TEST:
42elmerf90 ./PROG/USF_Init.f90 -o ./USF_Init
43ElmerGrid 1 2 mesh2D -metis 4 4
44mpirun -n 4 ElmerSolver_mpi
45
46Results established:
47--------------------
4819.03.2015
49Laure Tavard,LGGE
50Froggy cluster (CIMENT: Grenoble University HPC centre)
51Revision 58f71b4
52+------------------
5305.04.2018
54Updated F. Gillet-Chaulet.
55- reduce number of iterations from 5 to 2
56- test result from more solvers
57
58