<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="no"?>
<!DOCTYPE article SYSTEM "http://www.geosci-model-dev-discuss.net/inc/gmdd/copernicus.dtd">
<article language="en">
	<journal>
		<journal_title>Geoscientific Model Development Discussions</journal_title>
		<journal_url>www.geosci-model-dev-discuss.net</journal_url>
		<issn>1991-9611</issn>
		<eissn>1991-962X</eissn>
		<volume_number>3</volume_number>
		<issue_number>2</issue_number>
		<publication_year>2010</publication_year>
	</journal>
	<doi>10.5194/gmdd-3-451-2010</doi>
	<article_url>http://www.geosci-model-dev-discuss.net/3/451/2010/</article_url>
	<abstract_html>http://www.geosci-model-dev-discuss.net/3/451/2010/gmdd-3-451-2010.html</abstract_html>
	<fulltext_pdf>http://www.geosci-model-dev-discuss.net/3/451/2010/gmdd-3-451-2010.pdf</fulltext_pdf>
	<start_page>451</start_page>
	<end_page>472</end_page>
	<publication_date>2010-04-16</publication_date>
	<article_title content_type="html">Efficient approximation of the incomplete gamma function for use in cloud model applications</article_title>
	<authors>
		<author numeration="1" affiliations="1">
			<name>U. Blahak</name>
			<email>ulrich.blahak@kit.edu</email>
		</author>
	</authors>
	<affiliations>
		<affiliation numeration="1" content_type="html">Institute for Meteorology and Climate Research, Karlsruhe Institute of Technololgy (KIT), Karlsruhe, Germany</affiliation>
	</affiliations>
	<abstract content_type="html">This paper describes an approximation to the lower incomplete gamma function
&amp;gamma;&lt;sub&gt;&lt;i&gt;l&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/sub&gt;(&lt;i&gt;a,x&lt;/i&gt;) which has been obtained by nonlinear curve fitting. It comprises a fixed
number of terms and yields moderate accuracy (the absolute approximation error of
the corresponding normalized incomplete gamma function &lt;i&gt;P&lt;/i&gt; is smaller than 0.02 in the range
0.9 &amp;le; &lt;i&gt;a&lt;/i&gt; &amp;le; 45 and &lt;i&gt;x&lt;/i&gt; &amp;ge; 0). Monotonicity and asymptotic behaviour of the
original incomplete gamma function is preserved.

&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;
While providing a slight to moderate performance gain on scalar machines
(depending on whether &lt;i&gt;a&lt;/i&gt; stays the same for subsequent function evaluations
or not) compared to established and more accurate methods based on series- or continued fraction
expansions with a variable number of terms, a big advantage over these more accurate methods is the applicability
on vector CPUs. Here the fixed number of terms enables proper and efficient
vectorization.
The fixed number of terms might be also beneficial on
massively parallel machines to avoid load imbalances, caused by a possibly vastly
different number of terms in series expansions to reach convergence at different grid points.
For many cloud microphysical applications, the provided moderate accuracy
should be enough.
However, on scalar machines and if &lt;i&gt;a&lt;/i&gt; is the same for subsequent function
evaluations, the most efficient method to evaluate incomplete
gamma functions is perhaps interpolation of pre-computed equidistant lookup tables.</abstract>
	<references>
		<reference numeration="1" content_type="text"> Abramowitz, M. and Stegun, I A.: Handbook of Mathematical Functions with Formulas, Graphs, and Mathematical Tables, Dover Publications, 1970. </reference>
		<reference numeration="2" content_type="text"> Chandrasekar, V. and Bringi, V N.: Simulation of Radar Reflectivity and Surface Measurements of Rainfall, J Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 4, 464–478, 1987. </reference>
		<reference numeration="3" content_type="text"> Cotton, W R., Tripoli, G J., Rauber, R M., and Mulvihill, E A.: Numerical Simulation of the Effects of Varying Ice Crystal Nucleation Rates and Aggregation Processes on Orographic Snowfall, J Appl. Meteor., 25, 1658–1680, 1986. </reference>
		<reference numeration="4" content_type="text"> Deirmendjian, D.: Far-Infrared and Submillimeter Wave Attenuation by Clouds and Rain, J Appl. Meteor., 14, 1584–1593, 1975. </reference>
		<reference numeration="5" content_type="text"> Farley, R D., Price, P E., Orville, H D., and Hirsch, J H.: On the Numerical Simulation of Graupel/Hail Initiation via the Riming of Snow in Bulk Water Microphysical Cloud Models, J Appl. Meteor., 28, 1128–1131, 1989. </reference>
		<reference numeration="6" content_type="text"> Harringon, J Y., Meyers, M P., Walko, R L., and Cotton, W R.: Parameterization of ice Crystal Conversion Processes Due to Vapor Deposition for Mesoscale Models Using Double-Moment Basis Functions. Part~1: Basic Formulation and Parcel Model Results, J Atmos. Sci., 52, 4344–4366, 1995. </reference>
		<reference numeration="7" content_type="text"> Illingworth, A J. and Blackman, T M.: The Need to Represent Raindrop Size Spectra as Normalized Gamma Distributions for the Interpretation of Polarization Radar Observations, J Appl. Meteor., 41, 286–297, 2002. </reference>
		<reference numeration="8" content_type="text"> Lanczos, C.: A Precision Approximation of the Gamma Function, J SIAM~Numer Anal. Ser B, 1, 86–96, 1964. </reference>
		<reference numeration="9" content_type="text"> Lin, Y.-L., Farley, R., and Orville, H.: Bulk Parameterization of the Snow Field in a Cloud Model, J Clim. Appl. Meteor., 22, 1065–1092, 1983. </reference>
		<reference numeration="10" content_type="text"> Locatelli, J D. and Hobbs, P V.: Fall Speeds and Masses of Solid Precipitation particles, J Geophys Res., 79, 2185–2197, 1974. </reference>
		<reference numeration="11" content_type="text"> Milbrandt, J A. and Yau, M K.: A Multimoment Bulk Microphysics Parameterization. Part~I: Analysis of the Role of the Spectral Shape Parameter, J Atmos. Sci., 62, 3051–3064, 2005. </reference>
		<reference numeration="12" content_type="text"> Press, W H., Teukolsky, S A., Vetterling, W T., and Flannery, B P.: Numerical Recipes in Fortran 77, Cambridge University Press, 1993. </reference>
		<reference numeration="13" content_type="text"> Pruppacher, H R. and Klett, J D.: Microphysics of Clouds and Precipitation, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Boston, London, 2. Edn., 1997. </reference>
		<reference numeration="14" content_type="text"> Seifert, A. and Beheng, K D.: A Two-Moment Cloud Microphysics Parameterization for Mixed-Phase Clouds. Part I: Model Description, Meteorol. Atmos. Phys., 92, 45–66, 2006. </reference>
		<reference numeration="15" content_type="text"> Testud, J., Oury, S., Black, R A., Amayenc, P., and Dou, X.: The Concept of &quot;Normalized&quot; Distribution to Describe Raindrop Spectra: A Tool for Cloud Physics and Cloud Remote Sensing, J Appl. Meteor., 40, 1118–1140, 2001. </reference>
		<reference numeration="16" content_type="text"> Walko, R L., Cotton, W R., Meyers, M P., and Harrington, J Y.: New RAMS Cloud Microphysical Parameterization. Part I: The Single-Moment Scheme, Atmos. Res., 38, 29–62, 1995. </reference>
		<reference numeration="17" content_type="text"> Willis, P T.: Functional Fits to Some Observed Drop Size Distributions and Parameterization of Rain, J Atmos. Sci., 41, 1648–1661, 1984. </reference>
		<reference numeration="18" content_type="text"> Young, K C.: Microphysical Processes in Clouds, Oxford University Press, 1993. </reference>
		<reference numeration="19" content_type="text"> Ziegler, C L.: Retrieval of Thermal and Microphysical Variables in Observed Convective Storms. Part~1: Model Development and Preliminary Testing, J Atmos. Sci., 42, 1487–1509, 1985. </reference>
	</references>
</article>

