Canonical Correlation Analysis for finding patterns in coupled fields

First CCA pattern of Sea Level Pressure (SLP) and Sea Surface Temperature (SST) monthly anomalies for the region between -180 °W to -70 °W and +30 °N to -30 °S.

The following post demonstrates the use of Canonical Correlation Analysis (CCA) for diagnosing coupled patterns in climate fields. The method produces similar results to that of  Maximum Covariance Analysis (MCA), but patterns reflect maximum correlation rather than maximum covariance. Furthermore, the output of the model is a combination of linear models that can be used for field prediction.

This particular method was illustrated by Barnett and Preisendorfer (1997) - it constructs a CCA model based on a truncated subset of EOF coefficients (i.e. "principle components") instead of using the original field (as with MCA). This truncation has several benefits for the fitting of the model - First, one reduces the amount of noise in the problem by eliminating the higher EOF modes, which represent poorly organized, small-scale features of the fields. Second, by using orthogonal functions, the algebra of the problem is simplified (see von Storch and Zweiers 1999 for details). Bretherton etal. (1992) reviewed several techniques for diagnosing coupled patterns and found the Barnett and Preisendorfer method (hereafter "BPCCA") and MCA to be the most robust.

Maximum Covariance Analysis (MCA)

Maximum Covariance Analysis (MCA) (Mode 1; scaled) of Sea Level Pressure (SLP) and Sea Surface Temperature (SST) monthly anomalies for the region between -180 °W to -70 °W and +30 °N to -30 °S.  MCA coefficients (scaled) are below. The mode represents 94% of the squared covariance fraction (SCF).

Maximum Correlation Analysis (MCA) is similar to Empirical Orthogonal Function Analysis (EOF) in that they both deal with the decomposition of a covariance matrix. In EOF, this is a covariance matrix based on a single spatio-temporal field, while MCA is based on the decomposition of a "cross-covariance" matrix derived from two fields.

Empirical Orthogonal Function (EOF) Analysis for gappy data

[Updates]: The following approach has serious shortcomings, which I have recently become aware of. In a comparison of gappy EOF approaches Taylor et al. (2013) [pdf] show that this traditional approach is not as accurate as others. Specifically, the approach of DINEOF (Data Interpolating Empirical Orthogonal Functions) proved to be the most accurate. I have outlined the DINEOF algorithm in another post [link]. and show a comparison of gappoy EOF methods here: http://menugget.blogspot.de/2014/09/pca-eof-for-data-with-missing-values.html. The R package "sinkr" now contains a version of the function ("eof") for easy installation: https://github.com/menugget/sinkr

-----------------

The following is a function for the calculation of Empirical Orthogonal Functions (EOF). For those coming from a more biologically-oriented background and are familiar with Principal Component Analysis (PCA), the methods are similar. In the climate sciences the method is usually used for the decomposition of a data field into dominant spatial-temporal modes.