Chaos & Predictability Notation How to run

Chapter 11 · Lorenz 96: a many-variable atmosphere analogue

Part IV — Many scales, many degrees of freedom Knob: $F$, $N$, the time window live notebook

Overview

Everything in Part III was measured on a three-variable system. A forecast model has 10910^9. Which of those conclusions survive the change of scale?

The question is not rhetorical, and chapter 16 already found a casualty: in Lorenz 63 the gradient of a forecast metric points almost exactly along the fastest-growing direction, and in a forty-variable system the two are nearly orthogonal. Something has to sit between three variables and a general circulation model.

dxkdt=(xk+1xk2)xk1xk+F,k=1N(cyclic)\frac{dx_k}{dt} = \bigl(x_{k+1} - x_{k-2}\bigr)x_{k-1} - x_k + F, \qquad k = 1 \ldots N \quad \text{(cyclic)}

Read it as a latitude circle: the quadratic terms conserve kxk2\sum_k x_k^2 and stand in for advection, xk-x_k is dissipation, FF is the forcing. Nothing about it is derived from the equations of motion. It earns its place by being the smallest system that behaves like a field — errors have a wavelength, structures propagate, and the attractor grows with the domain.

The model

chaoslib.systems supplies the right-hand side and its Jacobian; chaoslib.spatial (new in this chapter, and used again in chapter 12) supplies the diagnostics that only make sense once a system has a space: power spectra, phase speeds, correlation lengths.

Two exact identities anchor the chapter. Every diagonal entry of the Jacobian is 1-1, so iλi=trJ=N\sum_i \lambda_i = \operatorname{tr}\mathbf{J} = -N for every FF, every NN and every trajectory. And the Jacobian at the uniform state xk=Fx_k = F is circulant, so Fourier modes diagonalise it in closed form:

σ(θ)=1+F(eiθe2iθ),θ=2πm/N.\sigma(\theta) = -1 + F\left(e^{i\theta} - e^{-2i\theta}\right), \qquad \theta = 2\pi m/N.

That is not an approximation — it reproduces all NN eigenvalues to 5×10145\times10^{-14}.

Prefer to run it yourself? Download as a Jupyter notebook — it installs its own dependencies in the first cell. The sliders are static in Jupyter; edit value= and re-run to change a parameter.

Four results

The wavelength is set by a linear instability, and comes out in closed form. Taking real parts, Reσ=1+F(cosθcos2θ)\operatorname{Re}\sigma = -1 + F(\cos\theta - \cos2\theta); with u=cosθu = \cos\theta the bracket is 1+u2u21 + u - 2u^2, maximised at u=1/4u = 1/4 with value 9/89/8. So a long chain destabilises at F=8/9F = 8/9 and a finite one at Fcrit=[maxm(cosθmcos2θm)]1F_{\rm crit} = [\max_m(\cos\theta_m - \cos2\theta_m)]^{-1} — exactly 2/5=0.89442/\sqrt5 = 0.8944 at N=40N = 40, where the best available mode is m=8m = 8. The nonlinear flow peaks one wavenumber away, at m=9m = 9.

Linear theory gets the scale nearly right and the speed badly wrong. The measured phase speed of the dominant mode is 2.1-2.1 sites per time unit against 7.3-7.3 predicted — a factor of 3.5. The prediction is made about a state the system is nowhere near, and finite-amplitude waves propagate on a flow they have themselves modified. The same lesson as chapter 15’s window of validity, from a different direction: the linearisation is quantitatively reliable for the instability that creates a structure, not for that structure’s later life.

There are two thresholds, and they are far apart. The uniform state loses stability at F=0.894F = 0.894, but λ1\lambda_1 stays within ±0.025\pm0.025 of zero until about F=4.25F = 4.25 — periodic waves with no error growth at all — and only becomes robustly positive near F=4.5F = 4.5. At F=8F = 8 the spectrum has 13 positive exponents, hKS=10.2h_{KS} = 10.2 nats per time unit and DKY=27.1D_{KY} = 27.1, against Lorenz 63’s 1, 0.905 and 2.06. The forty exponents sum to 40-40 to within 2.5×1052.5\times10^{-5}, a residual that is RK4 truncation and not non-convergence: it is independent of the averaging time and falls as Δt4\Delta t^4, both asserted by tests.

The model is extensive, and that is the point. Because the dynamics are local and the correlation length is a couple of sites, doubling the ring does not create a faster instability — it creates more independent copies of the same one. Measured over a 6.7-fold range of domain size: λ1\lambda_1 is flat above N30N \approx 30 (mean 1.711), the spectra collapse onto a single curve under ii/Ni \to i/N, and DKY=0.675ND_{KY} = 0.675\,N and hKS=0.256Nh_{KS} = 0.256\,N through the origin, with DKY/ND_{KY}/N varying by 2.4% across the whole range. Below N30N \approx 30 λ1\lambda_1 is suppressed, for a visible reason: the preferred wavelength is 4.4 sites, so a 12-site ring holds fewer than three waves and the instability is cramped by its own periodicity.

The forecasting consequence is a ratio. Lead time is set by λ1\lambda_1, an intensive quantity — a property of the dynamics that no amount of computing changes. The number of directions an ensemble must span is set by DKY0.68ND_{KY} \approx 0.68N, an extensive one. At 0.34 growing directions per variable, a model with 10710^7 variables has of order 3×1063\times10^6 of them, so fifty members is a rounding error against what needs sampling. Every ensemble method in Part V is a strategy for living with that ratio, and chapter 19’s localisation is a direct exploitation of the locality that makes the system extensive in the first place.

Exercises

Analytic. Derive σ(θ)\sigma(\theta) from the Jacobian at xk=Fx_k = F, and show that the maximum of cosθcos2θ\cos\theta - \cos2\theta is 9/89/8 at cosθ=1/4\cos\theta = 1/4. Deduce Fcrit8/9F_{\rm crit} \to 8/9 in the continuum limit, and explain why a finite ring’s threshold is always above that value.

Computational. Verify the trace identity iλi=N\sum_i\lambda_i = -N at two values of Δt\Delta t and confirm that the residual falls by roughly 16 when Δt\Delta t is halved while being unchanged by doubling the averaging time. Explain what each of those two facts rules out.

Exploratory. Measure the correlation length at N=12N = 12 and at N=40N = 40, and use it to account for the suppression of λ1\lambda_1 at small NN. How many correlation lengths does a ring need before it counts as large?

Further reading