- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine
Access Provided by Xinjiang University

Physical Review Fluids

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Invited
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Can we predict the weather? New tools for an old problem

Bérengère Dubrulle1,*, Ariane Barlet1, Amaury Barral1, Adam Cheminet1, Guillaume Costa1, Pietro Dragoni1, Abhishek Harikrishnan1, Adrien Lopez1, Kirone Mallick2 et al.

Quentin Pikeroen1

  • 1Université Paris-Saclay, CEA, CNRS, SPEC, 91191 Gif-sur-Yvette, France
  • 2Université Paris-Saclay, CEA, CNRS, IPhT, 91191 Gif-sur-Yvette, France

  • *Contact author: berengere.dubrulle@cea.fr
PDF

Phys. Rev. Fluids 10, 083801 – Published 14 August, 2025Erratum Phys. Rev. Fluids 11, 049901 (2026)

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/25dz-vjmt

Abstract

Today's weather forecast is based on a simulation of established laws of physics and mathematics. Despite important progress in computing power, observations, and mathematics, predicting the weather reliably for more than a few days has always been a major challenge. In the late 1950s and 1960s, Lewis Fry Richardson, and later, Edward Lorenz, set up the basis for the understanding of this challenge, using observations, phenomenological arguments, and low-order models. Here, we first summarize their findings, then discuss some of the recent advances in this domain, made possible through the advent of new numerical and theoretical tools.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Erratum

Erratum: Can we predict the weather? New tools for an old problem [Phys. Rev. Fluids 10, 083801 (2025)]

Bérengère Dubrulle, Antoine Barlet, Amaury Barral, Adam Cheminet, Guillaume Costa, Pietro Dragoni, Abhishek Harikrishnan, Adrien Lopez, Kirone Mallick, and Quentin Pikeroen
Phys. Rev. Fluids 11, 049901 (2026)

Article Text

References (47)

  1. J. Smagorinsky, General circulation experiments with the primitive equations: I. the basic experiment*, Mon. Weather Rev. 91, 99 (1963).
  2. L. Fry Richardson, Weather Prediction by Numerical Process, 2nd ed., Cambridge Mathematical Library (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 2007).
  3. L. Fery and D. Faranda, Analysing 23 years of warm-season derechos in France: a climatology and investigation of synoptic and environmental changes, Weather and Climate Dynamics 5, 439 (2024).
  4. E. N. Lorenz, Deterministic nonperiodic flow, J. Atmos. Sci. 20, 130 (1963).
  5. E. N. Lorenz, The predictability of a flow which possesses many scales of motion, Tellus 21, 289 (1969).
  6. T. N. Palmer, A. Döring, and G. Seregin, The real butterfly effect, Nonlinearity 27, R123 (2014).
  7. A. A. Mailybaev and A. Raibekas, Spontaneous stochasticity and renormalization group in discrete multi-scale dynamics, Commun. Math. Phys. 401, 2643 (2023).
  8. A. A. Mailybaev, Spontaneous stochasticity of velocity in turbulence models, Multiscale Model. Simul. 14, 96 (2016).
  9. D. Bandak, A. A. Mailybaev, G. L. Eyink, and N. Goldenfeld, Spontaneous stochasticity amplifies even thermal noise to the largest scales of turbulence in a few eddy turnover times, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 104002 (2024).
  10. G. Falkovich, K. Gawdzki, and M. Vergassola, Particles and fields in fluid turbulence, Rev. Mod. Phys. 73, 913 (2001).
  11. G. L. Eyink and T. D. Drivas, Spontaneous stochasticity and anomalous dissipation for Burgers' equation, J. Stat. Phys. 158, 386 (2015).
  12. S. Thalabard, J. Bec, and A. A. Mailybaev, From the butterfly effect to spontaneous stochasticity in singular shear flows, Commun. Phys. 3, 122 (2020).
  13. C. S. Campolina and A. A. Mailybaev, Chaotic blowup in the 3d incompressible Euler equations on a logarithmic lattice, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 064501 (2018).
  14. L. F. Richardson, Diffusion shown on a distance-neighbour graph, Proc. R. Soc. London A 110, 709 (1926).
  15. A. Barlet, The real butterfly effect: from unpredictability to probing spontaneous stochasticity, Ph.D. thesis, Université de Paris-Saclay (2024).
  16. A. Barlet, A. Cheminet, B. Dubrulle, and A. A. Mailybaev, Spontaneous stochasticity in a 3d Weierstrass-ABC flow, arXiv:2502.07581.
  17. C. S. Campolina and A. A. Mailybaev, Fluid dynamics on logarithmic lattices, Nonlinearity 34, 4684 (2021).
  18. M. Meneguzzi, H. Politano, A. Pouquet, and M. Zolver, A sparse-mode spectral method for the simulation of turbulent flows, J. Comput. Phys. 123, 32 (1996).
  19. S. Grossmann, D. Lohse, V. L'vov, and I. Procaccia, Finite size corrections to scaling in high Reynolds number turbulence, Phys. Rev. Lett. 73, 432 (1994).
  20. U. Frisch, A. Pomyalov, I. Procaccia, and S. S. Ray, Turbulence in noninteger dimensions by fractal Fourier decimation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 074501 (2012).
  21. A. S. Lanotte, R. Benzi, S. K. Malapaka, F. Toschi, and L. Biferale, Turbulence on a fractal Fourier set, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 264502 (2015).
  22. Q. Pikeroen, A. Barral, G. Costa, C. Campolina, A. Mailybaev, and B. Dubrulle, Tracking complex singularities of fluids on log-lattices, Nonlinearity 37, 115003 (2024).
  23. C. E. Leith and R. H. Kraichnan, Predictability of turbulent flows, J. Atmos. Sci. 29, 1041 (1972).
  24. D. Ruelle, Microscopic fluctuations and turbulence, Phys. Lett. A 72, 81 (1979).
  25. G. L. Eyink, Turbulence noise, J. Stat. Phys. 83, 955 (1996).
  26. A. Harikrishnan, A. Lopez, and B. Dubrulle, Viscous and inviscid reconnection of vortex rings on logarithmic lattices, arXiv:2502.19005.
  27. D. Lucente, C. Herbert, and F. Bouchet, Committor functions for climate phenomena at the predictability margin: The example of El Niño–Southern Oscillation in the Jin and Timmermann model, J. Atmos. Sci. 79, 2387 (2022).
  28. T. Palmer, The real butterfly effect and maggoty apples, Phys. Today 77, 30 (2024).
  29. G. L. Eyink and D. Bandak, Renormalization group approach to spontaneous stochasticity, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 043161 (2020).
  30. A. A. Mailybaev, Rg analysis of spontaneous stochasticity on a fractal lattice: Stability and bifurcations, J. Stat. Phys. 192, 37 (2025).
  31. L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz, Fluid Mechanics, 1st ed. (Pergamon Press, Oxford, England, 1959).
  32. S. K. Harouna and E. Mémin, Stochastic representation of the Reynolds transport theorem: Revisiting large-scale modeling, Comput. Fluids 156, 456 (2017).
  33. C. E. Leith, Stochastic backscatter in a subgrid-scale model: Plane shear mixing layer, Phys. Fluids 2, 297 (1990).
  34. K. Hasselmann, Stochastic climate models part I. Theory, Tellus 28, 473 (1976).
  35. J. Egger, Stochastically driven large-scale circulations with multiple equilibria, J. Atmos. Sci. 38, 2606 (1981).
  36. T. N. Palmer, A nonlinear dynamical perspective on model error: A proposal for non-local stochastic-dynamic parametrization in weather and climate prediction models, Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc. 127, 279 (2001).
  37. A. J. Majda, I. Timofeyev, and E. Vanden-Eijnden, Systematic strategies for stochastic mode reduction in climate, J. Atmos. Sci. 60, 1705 (2003).
  38. W. Bauer, P. Chandramouli, L. Li, and E. Mémin, Stochastic representation of mesoscale eddy effects in coarse-resolution barotropic models, Ocean Modelling 151, 101646 (2020).
  39. B. F. Farrell and P. J. Ioannou, Variance maintained by stochastic forcing of non-normal dynamical systems associated with linearly stable shear flows, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72, 1188 (1994).
  40. T. Grafke, R. Grauer, and T. Schäfer, The instanton method and its numerical implementation in fluid mechanics, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 48, 333001 (2015).
  41. T. Grafke and E. Vanden-Eijnden, Numerical computation of rare events via large deviation theory, Chaos: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science 29, 063118 (2019).
  42. F. Ragone, J. Wouters, and F. Bouchet, Computation of extreme heat waves in climate models using a large deviation algorithm, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 115, 24 (2018).
  43. V. M. Galfi and V. Lucarini, Fingerprinting heatwaves and cold spells and assessing their response to climate change using large deviation theory, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 058701 (2021).
  44. R. Noyelle, P. Yiou, and D. Faranda, Investigating the typicality of the dynamics leading to extreme temperatures in the IPSL-CM6A-LR model, Climate Dynamics 62, 1329 (2024).
  45. G. Dematteis, T. Grafke, M. Onorato, and E. Vanden-Eijnden, Experimental evidence of hydrodynamic instantons: The universal route to rogue waves, Phys. Rev. X 9, 041057 (2019).
  46. A. Fuchs, C. Herbert, J. Rolland, M. Wächter, F. Bouchet, and J. Peinke, Instantons and the path to intermittency in turbulent flows, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 034502 (2022).
  47. E. Simonnet, Computing non-equilibrium trajectories by a deep learning approach, J. Comput. Phys. 491, 112349 (2023).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Fluids 10, 083801– Published 14 August, 2025
  • Received 26 May 2025
  • Accepted 16 June 2025
Crossmark - Check for updates button

©2025 American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation