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