Changeset 11564 for NEMO/branches/2019/dev_r10973_AGRIF-01_jchanut_small_jpi_jpj/doc/latex/NEMO/subfiles/chap_TRA.tex

Timestamp:

2019-09-18T16:11:52+02:00 (5 years ago)

Author:

jchanut

Message:

#2199, merged with trunk

Location:

NEMO/branches/2019/dev_r10973_AGRIF-01_jchanut_small_jpi_jpj/doc

Files:

• . (modified) (1 prop)
• latex (modified) (1 prop)
• latex/NEMO (modified) (1 prop)
• latex/NEMO/subfiles/chap_TRA.tex (modified) (78 diffs)

NEMO/branches/2019/dev_r10973_AGRIF-01_jchanut_small_jpi_jpj/doc/latex

@@ -1 @@
-*.aux
-*.bbl
-*.blg
-*.dvi
-*.fdb*
-*.fls
-*.idx
-*.ilg
-*.ind
-*.log
-*.maf
-*.mtc*
-*.out
-*.pdf
-*.toc
-_minted-*
+figures

@@ -1 @@
-*.aux
-*.bbl
-*.blg
-*.dvi
-*.fdb*
-*.fls
-*.idx
-*.ilg
-*.ind
-*.log
-*.maf
-*.mtc*
-*.out
-*.pdf
-*.toc
-_minted-*
+figures

NEMO/branches/2019/dev_r10973_AGRIF-01_jchanut_small_jpi_jpj/doc/latex/NEMO/subfiles/chap_TRA.tex

@@ -8 +8 @@
 \label{chap:TRA}
 
-\minitoc
-
-% missing/update 
+\chaptertoc
+
+% missing/update
 % traqsr: need to coordinate with SBC module
 
-%STEVEN :  is the use of the word "positive" to describe a scheme enough, or should it be "positive definite"? I added a comment to this effect on some instances of this below
+%STEVEN :  is the use of the word "positive" to describe a scheme enough, or should it be "positive definite"?
+%I added a comment to this effect on some instances of this below
 
 Using the representation described in \autoref{chap:DOM}, several semi -discrete space forms of
@@ -35 +36 @@
 The terms QSR, BBC, BBL and DMP are optional.
 The external forcings and parameterisations require complex inputs and complex calculations
-(\eg bulk formulae, estimation of mixing coefficients) that are carried out in the SBC,
+(\eg\ bulk formulae, estimation of mixing coefficients) that are carried out in the SBC,
 LDF and ZDF modules and described in \autoref{chap:SBC}, \autoref{chap:LDF} and
 \autoref{chap:ZDF}, respectively.
@@ -47 +48 @@
 associated modules \mdl{eosbn2} and \mdl{phycst}).
 
-The different options available to the user are managed by namelist logicals or CPP keys.
+The different options available to the user are managed by namelist logicals.
 For each equation term \textit{TTT}, the namelist logicals are \textit{ln\_traTTT\_xxx},
 where \textit{xxx} is a 3 or 4 letter acronym corresponding to each optional scheme.
-The CPP key (when it exists) is \key{traTTT}.
 The equivalent code can be found in the \textit{traTTT} or \textit{traTTT\_xxx} module,
 in the \path{./src/OCE/TRA} directory.
 
 The user has the option of extracting each tendency term on the RHS of the tracer equation for output
-(\np{ln\_tra\_trd} or \np{ln\_tra\_mxl}~\forcode{= .true.}), as described in \autoref{chap:DIA}.
+(\np{ln\_tra\_trd} or \np{ln\_tra\_mxl}\forcode{=.true.}), as described in \autoref{chap:DIA}.
 
 % ================================================================
 % Tracer Advection
 % ================================================================
-\section{Tracer advection (\protect\mdl{traadv})}
+\section[Tracer advection (\textit{traadv.F90})]
+{Tracer advection (\protect\mdl{traadv})}
 \label{sec:TRA_adv}
 %------------------------------------------namtra_adv-----------------------------------------------------
 
-\nlst{namtra_adv}
+\begin{listing}
+  \nlst{namtra_adv}
+  \caption{\texttt{namtra\_adv}}
+  \label{lst:namtra_adv}
+\end{listing}
 %-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
-When considered (\ie when \np{ln\_traadv\_NONE} is not set to \forcode{.true.}),
+When considered (\ie\ when \np{ln\_traadv\_OFF} is not set to \forcode{.true.}),
 the advection tendency of a tracer is expressed in flux form,
-\ie as the divergence of the advective fluxes.
+\ie\ as the divergence of the advective fluxes.
 Its discrete expression is given by :
 \begin{equation}
-  \label{eq:tra_adv}
+  \label{eq:TRA_adv}
   ADV_\tau = - \frac{1}{b_t} \Big(   \delta_i [ e_{2u} \, e_{3u} \; u \; \tau_u]
                                    + \delta_j [ e_{1v} \, e_{3v} \; v \; \tau_v] \Big)
@@ -78 +83 @@
 \end{equation}
 where $\tau$ is either T or S, and $b_t = e_{1t} \, e_{2t} \, e_{3t}$ is the volume of $T$-cells.
-The flux form in \autoref{eq:tra_adv} implicitly requires the use of the continuity equation.
+The flux form in \autoref{eq:TRA_adv} implicitly requires the use of the continuity equation.
 Indeed, it is obtained by using the following equality: $\nabla \cdot (\vect U \, T) = \vect U \cdot \nabla T$ which
 results from the use of the continuity equation, $\partial_t e_3 + e_3 \; \nabla \cdot \vect U = 0$
-(which reduces to $\nabla \cdot \vect U = 0$ in linear free surface, \ie \np{ln\_linssh}~\forcode{= .true.}).
+(which reduces to $\nabla \cdot \vect U = 0$ in linear free surface, \ie\ \np{ln\_linssh}\forcode{=.true.}).
 Therefore it is of paramount importance to design the discrete analogue of the advection tendency so that
 it is consistent with the continuity equation in order to enforce the conservation properties of
 the continuous equations.
-In other words, by setting $\tau = 1$ in (\autoref{eq:tra_adv}) we recover the discrete form of
+In other words, by setting $\tau = 1$ in (\autoref{eq:TRA_adv}) we recover the discrete form of
 the continuity equation which is used to calculate the vertical velocity.
 %>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
 \begin{figure}[!t]
-  \begin{center}
-    \includegraphics[]{Fig_adv_scheme}
-    \caption{
-      \protect\label{fig:adv_scheme}
-      Schematic representation of some ways used to evaluate the tracer value at $u$-point and
-      the amount of tracer exchanged between two neighbouring grid points.
-      Upsteam biased scheme (ups):
-      the upstream value is used and the black area is exchanged.
-      Piecewise parabolic method (ppm):
-      a parabolic interpolation is used and the black and dark grey areas are exchanged.
-      Monotonic upstream scheme for conservative laws (muscl):
-      a parabolic interpolation is used and black, dark grey and grey areas are exchanged.
-      Second order scheme (cen2):
-      the mean value is used and black, dark grey, grey and light grey areas are exchanged.
-      Note that this illustration does not include the flux limiter used in ppm and muscl schemes.
-    }
-  \end{center}
+  \centering
+  \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Fig_adv_scheme}
+  \caption[Ways to evaluate the tracer value and the amount of tracer exchanged]{
+    Schematic representation of some ways used to evaluate the tracer value at $u$-point and
+    the amount of tracer exchanged between two neighbouring grid points.
+    Upsteam biased scheme (ups):
+    the upstream value is used and the black area is exchanged.
+    Piecewise parabolic method (ppm):
+    a parabolic interpolation is used and the black and dark grey areas are exchanged.
+    Monotonic upstream scheme for conservative laws (muscl):
+    a parabolic interpolation is used and black, dark grey and grey areas are exchanged.
+    Second order scheme (cen2):
+    the mean value is used and black, dark grey, grey and light grey areas are exchanged.
+    Note that this illustration does not include the flux limiter used in ppm and muscl schemes.}
+  \label{fig:TRA_adv_scheme}
 \end{figure}
 %>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
 
-The key difference between the advection schemes available in \NEMO is the choice made in space and
+The key difference between the advection schemes available in \NEMO\ is the choice made in space and
 time interpolation to define the value of the tracer at the velocity points
-(\autoref{fig:adv_scheme}).
+(\autoref{fig:TRA_adv_scheme}).
 
 Along solid lateral and bottom boundaries a zero tracer flux is automatically specified,
@@ -119 +122 @@
 \begin{description}
 \item[linear free surface:]
-  (\np{ln\_linssh}~\forcode{= .true.})
+  (\np{ln\_linssh}\forcode{=.true.})
   the first level thickness is constant in time:
   the vertical boundary condition is applied at the fixed surface $z = 0$ rather than on
   the moving surface $z = \eta$.
   There is a non-zero advective flux which is set for all advection schemes as
-  $\tau_w|_{k = 1/2} = T_{k = 1}$, \ie the product of surface velocity (at $z = 0$) by
+  $\tau_w|_{k = 1/2} = T_{k = 1}$, \ie\ the product of surface velocity (at $z = 0$) by
   the first level tracer value.
 \item[non-linear free surface:]
-  (\np{ln\_linssh}~\forcode{= .false.})
+  (\np{ln\_linssh}\forcode{=.false.})
   convergence/divergence in the first ocean level moves the free surface up/down.
   There is no tracer advection through it so that the advective fluxes through the surface are also zero.
@@ -136 +139 @@
 Nevertheless, in the latter case, it is achieved to a good approximation since
 the non-conservative term is the product of the time derivative of the tracer and the free surface height,
-two quantities that are not correlated \citep{Roullet_Madec_JGR00, Griffies_al_MWR01, Campin2004}.
-
-The velocity field that appears in (\autoref{eq:tra_adv} and \autoref{eq:tra_adv_zco}) is
-the centred (\textit{now}) \textit{effective} ocean velocity, \ie the \textit{eulerian} velocity
+two quantities that are not correlated \citep{roullet.madec_JGR00, griffies.pacanowski.ea_MWR01, campin.adcroft.ea_OM04}.
+
+The velocity field that appears in (\autoref{eq:TRA_adv} is
+the centred (\textit{now}) \textit{effective} ocean velocity, \ie\ the \textit{eulerian} velocity
 (see \autoref{chap:DYN}) plus the eddy induced velocity (\textit{eiv}) and/or
 the mixed layer eddy induced velocity (\textit{eiv}) when those parameterisations are used
@@ -148 +151 @@
 Conservative Laws scheme (MUSCL), a $3^{rd}$ Upstream Biased Scheme (UBS, also often called UP3),
 and a Quadratic Upstream Interpolation for Convective Kinematics with Estimated Streaming Terms scheme (QUICKEST).
-The choice is made in the \ngn{namtra\_adv} namelist, by setting to \forcode{.true.} one of
+The choice is made in the \nam{tra\_adv} namelist, by setting to \forcode{.true.} one of
 the logicals \textit{ln\_traadv\_xxx}.
 The corresponding code can be found in the \textit{traadv\_xxx.F90} module, where
 \textit{xxx} is a 3 or 4 letter acronym corresponding to each scheme.
-By default (\ie in the reference namelist, \textit{namelist\_ref}), all the logicals are set to \forcode{.false.}.
+By default (\ie\ in the reference namelist, \textit{namelist\_ref}), all the logicals are set to \forcode{.false.}.
 If the user does not select an advection scheme in the configuration namelist (\textit{namelist\_cfg}),
 the tracers will \textit{not} be advected!
@@ -183 +186 @@
 %        2nd and 4th order centred schemes
 % -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-\subsection{CEN: Centred scheme (\protect\np{ln\_traadv\_cen}~\forcode{= .true.})}
+\subsection[CEN: Centred scheme (\forcode{ln_traadv_cen=.true.})]
+{CEN: Centred scheme (\protect\np{ln\_traadv\_cen}\forcode{=.true.})}
 \label{subsec:TRA_adv_cen}
 
-%        2nd order centred scheme  
-
-The centred advection scheme (CEN) is used when \np{ln\_traadv\_cen}~\forcode{= .true.}.
+%        2nd order centred scheme
+
+The centred advection scheme (CEN) is used when \np{ln\_traadv\_cen}\forcode{=.true.}.
 Its order ($2^{nd}$ or $4^{th}$) can be chosen independently on horizontal (iso-level) and vertical direction by
 setting \np{nn\_cen\_h} and \np{nn\_cen\_v} to $2$ or $4$.
@@ -197 +201 @@
 For example, in the $i$-direction :
 \begin{equation}
-  \label{eq:tra_adv_cen2}
+  \label{eq:TRA_adv_cen2}
   \tau_u^{cen2} = \overline T ^{i + 1/2}
 \end{equation}
 
-CEN2 is non diffusive (\ie it conserves the tracer variance, $\tau^2$) but dispersive
-(\ie it may create false extrema).
+CEN2 is non diffusive (\ie\ it conserves the tracer variance, $\tau^2$) but dispersive
+(\ie\ it may create false extrema).
 It is therefore notoriously noisy and must be used in conjunction with an explicit diffusion operator to
 produce a sensible solution.
 The associated time-stepping is performed using a leapfrog scheme in conjunction with an Asselin time-filter,
-so $T$ in (\autoref{eq:tra_adv_cen2}) is the \textit{now} tracer value.
+so $T$ in (\autoref{eq:TRA_adv_cen2}) is the \textit{now} tracer value.
 
 Note that using the CEN2, the overall tracer advection is of second order accuracy since
-both (\autoref{eq:tra_adv}) and (\autoref{eq:tra_adv_cen2}) have this order of accuracy.
-
-%        4nd order centred scheme  
+both (\autoref{eq:TRA_adv}) and (\autoref{eq:TRA_adv_cen2}) have this order of accuracy.
+
+%        4nd order centred scheme
 
 In the $4^{th}$ order formulation (CEN4), tracer values are evaluated at u- and v-points as
@@ -217 +221 @@
 For example, in the $i$-direction:
 \begin{equation}
-  \label{eq:tra_adv_cen4}
+  \label{eq:TRA_adv_cen4}
   \tau_u^{cen4} = \overline{T - \frac{1}{6} \, \delta_i \Big[ \delta_{i + 1/2}[T] \, \Big]}^{\,i + 1/2}
 \end{equation}
-In the vertical direction (\np{nn\_cen\_v}~\forcode{= 4}),
-a $4^{th}$ COMPACT interpolation has been prefered \citep{Demange_PhD2014}.
+In the vertical direction (\np{nn\_cen\_v}\forcode{=4}),
+a $4^{th}$ COMPACT interpolation has been prefered \citep{demange_phd14}.
 In the COMPACT scheme, both the field and its derivative are interpolated, which leads, after a matrix inversion,
-spectral characteristics similar to schemes of higher order \citep{Lele_JCP1992}. 
+spectral characteristics similar to schemes of higher order \citep{lele_JCP92}.
 
 Strictly speaking, the CEN4 scheme is not a $4^{th}$ order advection scheme but
 a $4^{th}$ order evaluation of advective fluxes,
-since the divergence of advective fluxes \autoref{eq:tra_adv} is kept at $2^{nd}$ order.
+since the divergence of advective fluxes \autoref{eq:TRA_adv} is kept at $2^{nd}$ order.
 The expression \textit{$4^{th}$ order scheme} used in oceanographic literature is usually associated with
 the scheme presented here.
@@ -235 +239 @@
 
 A direct consequence of the pseudo-fourth order nature of the scheme is that it is not non-diffusive,
-\ie the global variance of a tracer is not preserved using CEN4.
+\ie\ the global variance of a tracer is not preserved using CEN4.
 Furthermore, it must be used in conjunction with an explicit diffusion operator to produce a sensible solution.
 As in CEN2 case, the time-stepping is performed using a leapfrog scheme in conjunction with an Asselin time-filter,
-so $T$ in (\autoref{eq:tra_adv_cen4}) is the \textit{now} tracer.
+so $T$ in (\autoref{eq:TRA_adv_cen4}) is the \textit{now} tracer.
 
 At a $T$-grid cell adjacent to a boundary (coastline, bottom and surface),
@@ -248 +252 @@
 
 % -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-%        FCT scheme  
-% -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-\subsection{FCT: Flux Corrected Transport scheme (\protect\np{ln\_traadv\_fct}~\forcode{= .true.})}
+%        FCT scheme
+% -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+\subsection[FCT: Flux Corrected Transport scheme (\forcode{ln_traadv_fct=.true.})]
+{FCT: Flux Corrected Transport scheme (\protect\np{ln\_traadv\_fct}\forcode{=.true.})}
 \label{subsec:TRA_adv_tvd}
 
-The Flux Corrected Transport schemes (FCT) is used when \np{ln\_traadv\_fct}~\forcode{= .true.}.
+The Flux Corrected Transport schemes (FCT) is used when \np{ln\_traadv\_fct}\forcode{=.true.}.
 Its order ($2^{nd}$ or $4^{th}$) can be chosen independently on horizontal (iso-level) and vertical direction by
 setting \np{nn\_fct\_h} and \np{nn\_fct\_v} to $2$ or $4$.
@@ -262 +267 @@
 For example, in the $i$-direction :
 \begin{equation}
-  \label{eq:tra_adv_fct}
+  \label{eq:TRA_adv_fct}
   \begin{split}
     \tau_u^{ups} &=
@@ -275 +280 @@
 where $c_u$ is a flux limiter function taking values between 0 and 1.
 The FCT order is the one of the centred scheme used
-(\ie it depends on the setting of \np{nn\_fct\_h} and \np{nn\_fct\_v}).
+(\ie\ it depends on the setting of \np{nn\_fct\_h} and \np{nn\_fct\_v}).
 There exist many ways to define $c_u$, each corresponding to a different FCT scheme.
-The one chosen in \NEMO is described in \citet{Zalesak_JCP79}.
+The one chosen in \NEMO\ is described in \citet{zalesak_JCP79}.
 $c_u$ only departs from $1$ when the advective term produces a local extremum in the tracer field.
 The resulting scheme is quite expensive but \textit{positive}.
 It can be used on both active and passive tracers.
-A comparison of FCT-2 with MUSCL and a MPDATA scheme can be found in \citet{Levy_al_GRL01}.
-
-An additional option has been added controlled by \np{nn\_fct\_zts}.
-By setting this integer to a value larger than zero,
-a $2^{nd}$ order FCT scheme is used on both horizontal and vertical direction, but on the latter,
-a split-explicit time stepping is used, with a number of sub-timestep equals to \np{nn\_fct\_zts}.
-This option can be useful when the size of the timestep is limited by vertical advection \citep{Lemarie_OM2015}.
-Note that in this case, a similar split-explicit time stepping should be used on vertical advection of momentum to
-insure a better stability (see \autoref{subsec:DYN_zad}).
-
-For stability reasons (see \autoref{chap:STP}),
-$\tau_u^{cen}$ is evaluated in (\autoref{eq:tra_adv_fct}) using the \textit{now} tracer while
+A comparison of FCT-2 with MUSCL and a MPDATA scheme can be found in \citet{levy.estublier.ea_GRL01}.
+
+
+For stability reasons (see \autoref{chap:TD}),
+$\tau_u^{cen}$ is evaluated in (\autoref{eq:TRA_adv_fct}) using the \textit{now} tracer while
 $\tau_u^{ups}$ is evaluated using the \textit{before} tracer.
 In other words, the advective part of the scheme is time stepped with a leap-frog scheme
@@ -298 +296 @@
 
 % -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-%        MUSCL scheme  
-% -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-\subsection{MUSCL: Monotone Upstream Scheme for Conservative Laws (\protect\np{ln\_traadv\_mus}~\forcode{= .true.})}
+%        MUSCL scheme
+% -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+\subsection[MUSCL: Monotone Upstream Scheme for Conservative Laws (\forcode{ln_traadv_mus=.true.})]
+{MUSCL: Monotone Upstream Scheme for Conservative Laws (\protect\np{ln\_traadv\_mus}\forcode{=.true.})}
 \label{subsec:TRA_adv_mus}
 
-The Monotone Upstream Scheme for Conservative Laws (MUSCL) is used when \np{ln\_traadv\_mus}~\forcode{= .true.}.
+The Monotone Upstream Scheme for Conservative Laws (MUSCL) is used when \np{ln\_traadv\_mus}\forcode{=.true.}.
 MUSCL implementation can be found in the \mdl{traadv\_mus} module.
 
-MUSCL has been first implemented in \NEMO by \citet{Levy_al_GRL01}.
+MUSCL has been first implemented in \NEMO\ by \citet{levy.estublier.ea_GRL01}.
 In its formulation, the tracer at velocity points is evaluated assuming a linear tracer variation between
-two $T$-points (\autoref{fig:adv_scheme}).
+two $T$-points (\autoref{fig:TRA_adv_scheme}).
 For example, in the $i$-direction :
 \begin{equation}
-  % \label{eq:tra_adv_mus}
+  % \label{eq:TRA_adv_mus}
   \tau_u^{mus} = \lt\{
   \begin{split}
@@ -331 +330 @@
 This choice ensure the \textit{positive} character of the scheme.
 In addition, fluxes round a grid-point where a runoff is applied can optionally be computed using upstream fluxes
-(\np{ln\_mus\_ups}~\forcode{= .true.}).
-
-% -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-%        UBS scheme  
-% -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-\subsection{UBS a.k.a. UP3: Upstream-Biased Scheme (\protect\np{ln\_traadv\_ubs}~\forcode{= .true.})}
+(\np{ln\_mus\_ups}\forcode{=.true.}).
+
+% -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+%        UBS scheme
+% -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+\subsection[UBS a.k.a. UP3: Upstream-Biased Scheme (\forcode{ln_traadv_ubs=.true.})]
+{UBS a.k.a. UP3: Upstream-Biased Scheme (\protect\np{ln\_traadv\_ubs}\forcode{=.true.})}
 \label{subsec:TRA_adv_ubs}
 
-The Upstream-Biased Scheme (UBS) is used when \np{ln\_traadv\_ubs}~\forcode{= .true.}.
+The Upstream-Biased Scheme (UBS) is used when \np{ln\_traadv\_ubs}\forcode{=.true.}.
 UBS implementation can be found in the \mdl{traadv\_mus} module.
 
@@ -347 +347 @@
 For example, in the $i$-direction:
 \begin{equation}
-  \label{eq:tra_adv_ubs}
+  \label{eq:TRA_adv_ubs}
   \tau_u^{ubs} = \overline T ^{i + 1/2} - \frac{1}{6}
     \begin{cases}
@@ -358 +358 @@
 
 This results in a dissipatively dominant (i.e. hyper-diffusive) truncation error
-\citep{Shchepetkin_McWilliams_OM05}.
-The overall performance of the advection scheme is similar to that reported in \cite{Farrow1995}.
+\citep{shchepetkin.mcwilliams_OM05}.
+The overall performance of the advection scheme is similar to that reported in \cite{farrow.stevens_JPO95}.
 It is a relatively good compromise between accuracy and smoothness.
 Nevertheless the scheme is not \textit{positive}, meaning that false extrema are permitted,
@@ -367 +367 @@
 The intrinsic diffusion of UBS makes its use risky in the vertical direction where
 the control of artificial diapycnal fluxes is of paramount importance
-\citep{Shchepetkin_McWilliams_OM05, Demange_PhD2014}.
+\citep{shchepetkin.mcwilliams_OM05, demange_phd14}.
 Therefore the vertical flux is evaluated using either a $2^nd$ order FCT scheme or a $4^th$ order COMPACT scheme
-(\np{nn\_cen\_v}~\forcode{= 2 or 4}).
-
-For stability reasons (see \autoref{chap:STP}), the first term  in \autoref{eq:tra_adv_ubs}
+(\np{nn\_ubs\_v}\forcode{=2 or 4}).
+
+For stability reasons (see \autoref{chap:TD}), the first term  in \autoref{eq:TRA_adv_ubs}
 (which corresponds to a second order centred scheme)
 is evaluated using the \textit{now} tracer (centred in time) while the second term
 (which is the diffusive part of the scheme),
 is evaluated using the \textit{before} tracer (forward in time).
-This choice is discussed by \citet{Webb_al_JAOT98} in the context of the QUICK advection scheme.
+This choice is discussed by \citet{webb.de-cuevas.ea_JAOT98} in the context of the QUICK advection scheme.
 UBS and QUICK schemes only differ by one coefficient.
-Replacing 1/6 with 1/8 in \autoref{eq:tra_adv_ubs} leads to the QUICK advection scheme \citep{Webb_al_JAOT98}.
+Replacing 1/6 with 1/8 in \autoref{eq:TRA_adv_ubs} leads to the QUICK advection scheme \citep{webb.de-cuevas.ea_JAOT98}.
 This option is not available through a namelist parameter, since the 1/6 coefficient is hard coded.
 Nevertheless it is quite easy to make the substitution in the \mdl{traadv\_ubs} module and obtain a QUICK scheme.
 
-Note that it is straightforward to rewrite \autoref{eq:tra_adv_ubs} as follows:
+Note that it is straightforward to rewrite \autoref{eq:TRA_adv_ubs} as follows:
 \begin{gather}
-  \label{eq:traadv_ubs2}
+  \label{eq:TRA_adv_ubs2}
   \tau_u^{ubs} = \tau_u^{cen4} + \frac{1}{12}
     \begin{cases}
@@ -391 +391 @@
     \end{cases}
   \intertext{or equivalently}
-  % \label{eq:traadv_ubs2b}
+  % \label{eq:TRA_adv_ubs2b}
   u_{i + 1/2} \ \tau_u^{ubs} = u_{i + 1/2} \, \overline{T - \frac{1}{6} \, \delta_i \Big[ \delta_{i + 1/2}[T] \Big]}^{\,i + 1/2}
                              - \frac{1}{2} |u|_{i + 1/2} \, \frac{1}{6} \, \delta_{i + 1/2} [\tau"_i] \nonumber
 \end{gather}
 
-\autoref{eq:traadv_ubs2} has several advantages.
+\autoref{eq:TRA_adv_ubs2} has several advantages.
 Firstly, it clearly reveals that the UBS scheme is based on the fourth order scheme to which
 an upstream-biased diffusion term is added.
 Secondly, this emphasises that the $4^{th}$ order part (as well as the $2^{nd}$ order part as stated above) has to
-be evaluated at the \textit{now} time step using \autoref{eq:tra_adv_ubs}.
+be evaluated at the \textit{now} time step using \autoref{eq:TRA_adv_ubs}.
 Thirdly, the diffusion term is in fact a biharmonic operator with an eddy coefficient which
 is simply proportional to the velocity: $A_u^{lm} = \frac{1}{12} \, {e_{1u}}^3 \, |u|$.
-Note the current version of NEMO uses the computationally more efficient formulation \autoref{eq:tra_adv_ubs}.
-
-% -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-%        QCK scheme  
-% -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-\subsection{QCK: QuiCKest scheme (\protect\np{ln\_traadv\_qck}~\forcode{= .true.})}
+Note the current version of \NEMO\ uses the computationally more efficient formulation \autoref{eq:TRA_adv_ubs}.
+
+% -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+%        QCK scheme
+% -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+\subsection[QCK: QuiCKest scheme (\forcode{ln_traadv_qck=.true.})]
+{QCK: QuiCKest scheme (\protect\np{ln\_traadv\_qck}\forcode{=.true.})}
 \label{subsec:TRA_adv_qck}
 
 The Quadratic Upstream Interpolation for Convective Kinematics with Estimated Streaming Terms (QUICKEST) scheme
-proposed by \citet{Leonard1979} is used when \np{ln\_traadv\_qck}~\forcode{= .true.}.
+proposed by \citet{leonard_CMAME79} is used when \np{ln\_traadv\_qck}\forcode{=.true.}.
 QUICKEST implementation can be found in the \mdl{traadv\_qck} module.
 
 QUICKEST is the third order Godunov scheme which is associated with the ULTIMATE QUICKEST limiter
-\citep{Leonard1991}.
-It has been implemented in NEMO by G. Reffray (MERCATOR-ocean) and can be found in the \mdl{traadv\_qck} module.
+\citep{leonard_CMAME91}.
+It has been implemented in \NEMO\ by G. Reffray (MERCATOR-ocean) and can be found in the \mdl{traadv\_qck} module.
 The resulting scheme is quite expensive but \textit{positive}.
 It can be used on both active and passive tracers.
@@ -431 +432 @@
 % Tracer Lateral Diffusion
 % ================================================================
-\section{Tracer lateral diffusion (\protect\mdl{traldf})}
+\section[Tracer lateral diffusion (\textit{traldf.F90})]
+{Tracer lateral diffusion (\protect\mdl{traldf})}
 \label{sec:TRA_ldf}
 %-----------------------------------------nam_traldf------------------------------------------------------
 
-\nlst{namtra_ldf}
+\begin{listing}
+  \nlst{namtra_ldf}
+  \caption{\texttt{namtra\_ldf}}
+  \label{lst:namtra_ldf}
+\end{listing}
 %-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- 
-Options are defined through the \ngn{namtra\_ldf} namelist variables.
-They are regrouped in four items, allowing to specify 
+
+Options are defined through the \nam{tra\_ldf} namelist variables.
+They are regrouped in four items, allowing to specify
 $(i)$   the type of operator used (none, laplacian, bilaplacian),
 $(ii)$  the direction along which the operator acts (iso-level, horizontal, iso-neutral),
-$(iii)$ some specific options related to the rotated operators (\ie non-iso-level operator), and
+$(iii)$ some specific options related to the rotated operators (\ie\ non-iso-level operator), and
 $(iv)$  the specification of eddy diffusivity coefficient (either constant or variable in space and time).
 Item $(iv)$ will be described in \autoref{chap:LDF}.
@@ -450 +456 @@
 
 The lateral diffusion of tracers is evaluated using a forward scheme,
-\ie the tracers appearing in its expression are the \textit{before} tracers in time,
+\ie\ the tracers appearing in its expression are the \textit{before} tracers in time,
 except for the pure vertical component that appears when a rotation tensor is used.
-This latter component is solved implicitly together with the vertical diffusion term (see \autoref{chap:STP}).
-When \np{ln\_traldf\_msc}~\forcode{= .true.}, a Method of Stabilizing Correction is used in which
-the pure vertical component is split into an explicit and an implicit part \citep{Lemarie_OM2012}.
+This latter component is solved implicitly together with the vertical diffusion term (see \autoref{chap:TD}).
+When \np{ln\_traldf\_msc}\forcode{=.true.}, a Method of Stabilizing Correction is used in which
+the pure vertical component is split into an explicit and an implicit part \citep{lemarie.debreu.ea_OM12}.
 
 % -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 %        Type of operator
 % -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-\subsection[Type of operator (\protect\np{ln\_traldf}\{\_NONE,\_lap,\_blp\}\})]{Type of operator (\protect\np{ln\_traldf\_NONE}, \protect\np{ln\_traldf\_lap}, or \protect\np{ln\_traldf\_blp}) } 
+\subsection[Type of operator (\texttt{ln\_traldf}\{\texttt{\_OFF,\_lap,\_blp}\})]
+{Type of operator (\protect\np{ln\_traldf\_OFF}, \protect\np{ln\_traldf\_lap}, or \protect\np{ln\_traldf\_blp}) }
 \label{subsec:TRA_ldf_op}
 
@@ -465 +472 @@
 
 \begin{description}
-\item[\np{ln\_traldf\_NONE}~\forcode{= .true.}:]
+\item[\np{ln\_traldf\_OFF}\forcode{=.true.}:]
   no operator selected, the lateral diffusive tendency will not be applied to the tracer equation.
   This option can be used when the selected advection scheme is diffusive enough (MUSCL scheme for example).
-\item[\np{ln\_traldf\_lap}~\forcode{= .true.}:]
+\item[\np{ln\_traldf\_lap}\forcode{=.true.}:]
   a laplacian operator is selected.
-  This harmonic operator takes the following expression:  $\mathpzc{L}(T) = \nabla \cdot A_{ht} \; \nabla T $,
+  This harmonic operator takes the following expression:  $\mathcal{L}(T) = \nabla \cdot A_{ht} \; \nabla T $,
   where the gradient operates along the selected direction (see \autoref{subsec:TRA_ldf_dir}),
   and $A_{ht}$ is the eddy diffusivity coefficient expressed in $m^2/s$ (see \autoref{chap:LDF}).
-\item[\np{ln\_traldf\_blp}~\forcode{= .true.}]:
+\item[\np{ln\_traldf\_blp}\forcode{=.true.}]:
   a bilaplacian operator is selected.
   This biharmonic operator takes the following expression:
-  $\mathpzc{B} = - \mathpzc{L}(\mathpzc{L}(T)) = - \nabla \cdot b \nabla (\nabla \cdot b \nabla T)$
+  $\mathcal{B} = - \mathcal{L}(\mathcal{L}(T)) = - \nabla \cdot b \nabla (\nabla \cdot b \nabla T)$
   where the gradient operats along the selected direction,
   and $b^2 = B_{ht}$ is the eddy diffusivity coefficient expressed in $m^4/s$ (see \autoref{chap:LDF}).
@@ -486 +493 @@
 minimizing the impact on the larger scale features.
 The main difference between the two operators is the scale selectiveness.
-The bilaplacian damping time (\ie its spin down time) scales like $\lambda^{-4}$ for
+The bilaplacian damping time (\ie\ its spin down time) scales like $\lambda^{-4}$ for
 disturbances of wavelength $\lambda$ (so that short waves damped more rapidelly than long ones),
 whereas the laplacian damping time scales only like $\lambda^{-2}$.
@@ -493 +500 @@
 %        Direction of action
 % -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-\subsection[Action direction (\protect\np{ln\_traldf}\{\_lev,\_hor,\_iso,\_triad\})]{Direction of action (\protect\np{ln\_traldf\_lev}, \protect\np{ln\_traldf\_hor}, \protect\np{ln\_traldf\_iso}, or \protect\np{ln\_traldf\_triad}) } 
+\subsection[Action direction (\texttt{ln\_traldf}\{\texttt{\_lev,\_hor,\_iso,\_triad}\})]
+{Direction of action (\protect\np{ln\_traldf\_lev}, \protect\np{ln\_traldf\_hor}, \protect\np{ln\_traldf\_iso}, or \protect\np{ln\_traldf\_triad}) }
 \label{subsec:TRA_ldf_dir}
 
 The choice of a direction of action determines the form of operator used.
 The operator is a simple (re-entrant) laplacian acting in the (\textbf{i},\textbf{j}) plane when
-iso-level option is used (\np{ln\_traldf\_lev}~\forcode{= .true.}) or
-when a horizontal (\ie geopotential) operator is demanded in \textit{z}-coordinate
-(\np{ln\_traldf\_hor} and \np{ln\_zco} equal \forcode{.true.}).
+iso-level option is used (\np{ln\_traldf\_lev}\forcode{=.true.}) or
+when a horizontal (\ie\ geopotential) operator is demanded in \textit{z}-coordinate
+(\np{ln\_traldf\_hor} and \np{ln\_zco}\forcode{=.true.}).
 The associated code can be found in the \mdl{traldf\_lap\_blp} module.
 The operator is a rotated (re-entrant) laplacian when
 the direction along which it acts does not coincide with the iso-level surfaces,
 that is when standard or triad iso-neutral option is used
-(\np{ln\_traldf\_iso} or \np{ln\_traldf\_triad} equals \forcode{.true.},
+(\np{ln\_traldf\_iso} or \np{ln\_traldf\_triad} = \forcode{.true.},
 see \mdl{traldf\_iso} or \mdl{traldf\_triad} module, resp.), or
-when a horizontal (\ie geopotential) operator is demanded in \textit{s}-coordinate
-(\np{ln\_traldf\_hor} and \np{ln\_sco} equal \forcode{.true.})
+when a horizontal (\ie\ geopotential) operator is demanded in \textit{s}-coordinate
+(\np{ln\_traldf\_hor} and \np{ln\_sco} = \forcode{.true.})
 \footnote{In this case, the standard iso-neutral operator will be automatically selected}.
 In that case, a rotation is applied to the gradient(s) that appears in the operator so that
@@ -519 +527 @@
 %       iso-level operator
 % -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-\subsection{Iso-level (bi -)laplacian operator ( \protect\np{ln\_traldf\_iso}) }
+\subsection[Iso-level (bi-)laplacian operator (\texttt{ln\_traldf\_iso})]
+{Iso-level (bi-)laplacian operator ( \protect\np{ln\_traldf\_iso})}
 \label{subsec:TRA_ldf_lev}
 
-The laplacian diffusion operator acting along the model (\textit{i,j})-surfaces is given by: 
-\begin{equation}
-  \label{eq:tra_ldf_lap}
+The laplacian diffusion operator acting along the model (\textit{i,j})-surfaces is given by:
+\begin{equation}
+  \label{eq:TRA_ldf_lap}
   D_t^{lT} = \frac{1}{b_t} \Bigg(   \delta_{i} \lt[ A_u^{lT} \; \frac{e_{2u} \, e_{3u}}{e_{1u}} \; \delta_{i + 1/2} [T] \rt]
                                   + \delta_{j} \lt[ A_v^{lT} \; \frac{e_{1v} \, e_{3v}}{e_{2v}} \; \delta_{j + 1/2} [T] \rt] \Bigg)
@@ -531 +540 @@
 where zero diffusive fluxes is assumed across solid boundaries,
 first (and third in bilaplacian case) horizontal tracer derivative are masked.
-It is implemented in the \rou{traldf\_lap} subroutine found in the \mdl{traldf\_lap} module.
-The module also contains \rou{traldf\_blp}, the subroutine calling twice \rou{traldf\_lap} in order to
+It is implemented in the \rou{tra\_ldf\_lap} subroutine found in the \mdl{traldf\_lap\_blp} module.
+The module also contains \rou{tra\_ldf\_blp}, the subroutine calling twice \rou{tra\_ldf\_lap} in order to
 compute the iso-level bilaplacian operator.
 
 It is a \textit{horizontal} operator (\ie acting along geopotential surfaces) in
 the $z$-coordinate with or without partial steps, but is simply an iso-level operator in the $s$-coordinate.
-It is thus used when, in addition to \np{ln\_traldf\_lap} or \np{ln\_traldf\_blp}~\forcode{= .true.},
-we have \np{ln\_traldf\_lev}~\forcode{= .true.} or \np{ln\_traldf\_hor}~=~\np{ln\_zco}~\forcode{= .true.}.
+It is thus used when, in addition to \np{ln\_traldf\_lap} or \np{ln\_traldf\_blp}\forcode{=.true.},
+we have \np{ln\_traldf\_lev}\forcode{=.true.} or \np{ln\_traldf\_hor}~=~\np{ln\_zco}\forcode{=.true.}.
 In both cases, it significantly contributes to diapycnal mixing.
 It is therefore never recommended, even when using it in the bilaplacian case.
 
-Note that in the partial step $z$-coordinate (\np{ln\_zps}~\forcode{= .true.}),
+Note that in the partial step $z$-coordinate (\np{ln\_zps}\forcode{=.true.}),
 tracers in horizontally adjacent cells are located at different depths in the vicinity of the bottom.
-In this case, horizontal derivatives in (\autoref{eq:tra_ldf_lap}) at the bottom level require a specific treatment.
+In this case, horizontal derivatives in (\autoref{eq:TRA_ldf_lap}) at the bottom level require a specific treatment.
 They are calculated in the \mdl{zpshde} module, described in \autoref{sec:TRA_zpshde}.
 
@@ -550 +559 @@
 %         Rotated laplacian operator
 % -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-\subsection{Standard and triad (bi -)laplacian operator}
+\subsection{Standard and triad (bi-)laplacian operator}
 \label{subsec:TRA_ldf_iso_triad}
 
-%&&    Standard rotated (bi -)laplacian operator
+%&&    Standard rotated (bi-)laplacian operator
 %&& ----------------------------------------------
-\subsubsection{Standard rotated (bi -)laplacian operator (\protect\mdl{traldf\_iso})}
+\subsubsection[Standard rotated (bi-)laplacian operator (\textit{traldf\_iso.F90})]
+{Standard rotated (bi-)laplacian operator (\protect\mdl{traldf\_iso})}
 \label{subsec:TRA_ldf_iso}
-The general form of the second order lateral tracer subgrid scale physics (\autoref{eq:PE_zdf})
+The general form of the second order lateral tracer subgrid scale physics (\autoref{eq:MB_zdf})
 takes the following semi -discrete space form in $z$- and $s$-coordinates:
 \begin{equation}
-  \label{eq:tra_ldf_iso}
+  \label{eq:TRA_ldf_iso}
   \begin{split}
     D_T^{lT} = \frac{1}{b_t} \Bigg[ \quad &\delta_i A_u^{lT} \lt( \frac{e_{2u} e_{3u}}{e_{1u}}                      \, \delta_{i + 1/2} [T]
@@ -573 +583 @@
 where $b_t = e_{1t} \, e_{2t} \, e_{3t}$  is the volume of $T$-cells,
 $r_1$ and $r_2$ are the slopes between the surface of computation ($z$- or $s$-surfaces) and
-the surface along which the diffusion operator acts (\ie horizontal or iso-neutral surfaces).
-It is thus used when, in addition to \np{ln\_traldf\_lap}~\forcode{= .true.},
-we have \np{ln\_traldf\_iso}~\forcode{= .true.},
-or both \np{ln\_traldf\_hor}~\forcode{= .true.} and \np{ln\_zco}~\forcode{= .true.}.
+the surface along which the diffusion operator acts (\ie\ horizontal or iso-neutral surfaces).
+It is thus used when, in addition to \np{ln\_traldf\_lap}\forcode{=.true.},
+we have \np{ln\_traldf\_iso}\forcode{=.true.},
+or both \np{ln\_traldf\_hor}\forcode{=.true.} and \np{ln\_zco}\forcode{=.true.}.
 The way these slopes are evaluated is given in \autoref{sec:LDF_slp}.
 At the surface, bottom and lateral boundaries, the turbulent fluxes of heat and salt are set to zero using
 the mask technique (see \autoref{sec:LBC_coast}).
 
-The operator in \autoref{eq:tra_ldf_iso} involves both lateral and vertical derivatives.
+The operator in \autoref{eq:TRA_ldf_iso} involves both lateral and vertical derivatives.
 For numerical stability, the vertical second derivative must be solved using the same implicit time scheme as that
 used in the vertical physics (see \autoref{sec:TRA_zdf}).
@@ -590 +600 @@
 This formulation conserves the tracer but does not ensure the decrease of the tracer variance.
 Nevertheless the treatment performed on the slopes (see \autoref{chap:LDF}) allows the model to run safely without
-any additional background horizontal diffusion \citep{Guilyardi_al_CD01}.
-
-Note that in the partial step $z$-coordinate (\np{ln\_zps}~\forcode{= .true.}),
-the horizontal derivatives at the bottom level in \autoref{eq:tra_ldf_iso} require a specific treatment.
+any additional background horizontal diffusion \citep{guilyardi.madec.ea_CD01}.
+
+Note that in the partial step $z$-coordinate (\np{ln\_zps}\forcode{=.true.}),
+the horizontal derivatives at the bottom level in \autoref{eq:TRA_ldf_iso} require a specific treatment.
 They are calculated in module zpshde, described in \autoref{sec:TRA_zpshde}.
 
-%&&     Triad rotated (bi -)laplacian operator
+%&&     Triad rotated (bi-)laplacian operator
 %&&  -------------------------------------------
-\subsubsection{Triad rotated (bi -)laplacian operator (\protect\np{ln\_traldf\_triad})}
+\subsubsection[Triad rotated (bi-)laplacian operator (\textit{ln\_traldf\_triad})]
+{Triad rotated (bi-)laplacian operator (\protect\np{ln\_traldf\_triad})}
 \label{subsec:TRA_ldf_triad}
 
-If the Griffies triad scheme is employed (\np{ln\_traldf\_triad}~\forcode{= .true.}; see \autoref{apdx:triad})
-
-An alternative scheme developed by \cite{Griffies_al_JPO98} which ensures tracer variance decreases
-is also available in \NEMO (\np{ln\_traldf\_grif}~\forcode{= .true.}).
-A complete description of the algorithm is given in \autoref{apdx:triad}.
-
-The lateral fourth order bilaplacian operator on tracers is obtained by applying (\autoref{eq:tra_ldf_lap}) twice.
+An alternative scheme developed by \cite{griffies.gnanadesikan.ea_JPO98} which ensures tracer variance decreases
+is also available in \NEMO\ (\np{ln\_traldf\_triad}\forcode{=.true.}).
+A complete description of the algorithm is given in \autoref{apdx:TRIADS}.
+
+The lateral fourth order bilaplacian operator on tracers is obtained by applying (\autoref{eq:TRA_ldf_lap}) twice.
 The operator requires an additional assumption on boundary conditions:
 both first and third derivative terms normal to the coast are set to zero.
 
-The lateral fourth order operator formulation on tracers is obtained by applying (\autoref{eq:tra_ldf_iso}) twice.
+The lateral fourth order operator formulation on tracers is obtained by applying (\autoref{eq:TRA_ldf_iso}) twice.
 It requires an additional assumption on boundary conditions:
 first and third derivative terms normal to the coast,
@@ -625 +634 @@
 \item \np{rn\_slpmax} = slope limit (both operators)
 \item \np{ln\_triad\_iso} = pure horizontal mixing in ML (triad only)
-\item \np{rn\_sw\_triad} $= 1$ switching triad; $= 0$ all 4 triads used (triad only) 
+\item \np{rn\_sw\_triad} $= 1$ switching triad; $= 0$ all 4 triads used (triad only)
 \item \np{ln\_botmix\_triad} = lateral mixing on bottom (triad only)
 \end{itemize}
@@ -632 +641 @@
 % Tracer Vertical Diffusion
 % ================================================================
-\section{Tracer vertical diffusion (\protect\mdl{trazdf})}
+\section[Tracer vertical diffusion (\textit{trazdf.F90})]
+{Tracer vertical diffusion (\protect\mdl{trazdf})}
 \label{sec:TRA_zdf}
 %--------------------------------------------namzdf---------------------------------------------------------
 
-\nlst{namzdf}
 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
-Options are defined through the \ngn{namzdf} namelist variables.
+Options are defined through the \nam{zdf} namelist variables.
 The formulation of the vertical subgrid scale tracer physics is the same for all the vertical coordinates,
 and is based on a laplacian operator.
-The vertical diffusion operator given by (\autoref{eq:PE_zdf}) takes the following semi -discrete space form:
+The vertical diffusion operator given by (\autoref{eq:MB_zdf}) takes the following semi -discrete space form:
 \begin{gather*}
-  % \label{eq:tra_zdf}
+  % \label{eq:TRA_zdf}
     D^{vT}_T = \frac{1}{e_{3t}} \, \delta_k \lt[ \, \frac{A^{vT}_w}{e_{3w}} \delta_{k + 1/2}[T] \, \rt] \\
     D^{vS}_T = \frac{1}{e_{3t}} \; \delta_k \lt[ \, \frac{A^{vS}_w}{e_{3w}} \delta_{k + 1/2}[S] \, \rt]
@@ -651 +660 @@
 respectively.
 Generally, $A_w^{vT} = A_w^{vS}$ except when double diffusive mixing is parameterised
-(\ie \key{zdfddm} is defined).
+(\ie\ \np{ln\_zdfddm}\forcode{=.true.},).
 The way these coefficients are evaluated is given in \autoref{chap:ZDF} (ZDF).
 Furthermore, when iso-neutral mixing is used, both mixing coefficients are increased by
 $\frac{e_{1w} e_{2w}}{e_{3w} }({r_{1w}^2 + r_{2w}^2})$ to account for the vertical second derivative of
-\autoref{eq:tra_ldf_iso}.
+\autoref{eq:TRA_ldf_iso}.
 
 At the surface and bottom boundaries, the turbulent fluxes of heat and salt must be specified.
@@ -663 +672 @@
 
 The large eddy coefficient found in the mixed layer together with high vertical resolution implies that
-in the case of explicit time stepping (\np{ln\_zdfexp}~\forcode{= .true.})
-there would be too restrictive a constraint on the time step.
-Therefore, the default implicit time stepping is preferred for the vertical diffusion since
+there would be too restrictive constraint on the time step if we use explicit time stepping.
+Therefore an implicit time stepping is preferred for the vertical diffusion since
 it overcomes the stability constraint.
-A forward time differencing scheme (\np{ln\_zdfexp}~\forcode{= .true.}) using
-a time splitting technique (\np{nn\_zdfexp} $> 1$) is provided as an alternative.
-Namelist variables \np{ln\_zdfexp} and \np{nn\_zdfexp} apply to both tracers and dynamics.
 
 % ================================================================
@@ -680 +685 @@
 %        surface boundary condition
 % -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-\subsection{Surface boundary condition (\protect\mdl{trasbc})}
+\subsection[Surface boundary condition (\textit{trasbc.F90})]
+{Surface boundary condition (\protect\mdl{trasbc})}
 \label{subsec:TRA_sbc}
 
@@ -690 +696 @@
 
 Due to interactions and mass exchange of water ($F_{mass}$) with other Earth system components
-(\ie atmosphere, sea-ice, land), the change in the heat and salt content of the surface layer of the ocean is due
+(\ie\ atmosphere, sea-ice, land), the change in the heat and salt content of the surface layer of the ocean is due
 both to the heat and salt fluxes crossing the sea surface (not linked with $F_{mass}$) and
 to the heat and salt content of the mass exchange.
@@ -702 +708 @@
 \item
   $Q_{ns}$, the non-solar part of the net surface heat flux that crosses the sea surface
-  (\ie the difference between the total surface heat flux and the fraction of the short wave flux that
+  (\ie\ the difference between the total surface heat flux and the fraction of the short wave flux that
   penetrates into the water column, see \autoref{subsec:TRA_qsr})
   plus the heat content associated with of the mass exchange with the atmosphere and lands.
@@ -720 +726 @@
 The surface boundary condition on temperature and salinity is applied as follows:
 \begin{equation}
-  \label{eq:tra_sbc}
+  \label{eq:TRA_sbc}
   \begin{alignedat}{2}
     F^T &= \frac{1}{C_p} &\frac{1}{\rho_o \lt. e_{3t} \rt|_{k = 1}} &\overline{Q_{ns}      }^t \\
@@ -728 +734 @@
 where $\overline x^t$ means that $x$ is averaged over two consecutive time steps
 ($t - \rdt / 2$ and $t + \rdt / 2$).
-Such time averaging prevents the divergence of odd and even time step (see \autoref{chap:STP}).
-
-In the linear free surface case (\np{ln\_linssh}~\forcode{= .true.}), an additional term has to be added on
+Such time averaging prevents the divergence of odd and even time step (see \autoref{chap:TD}).
+
+In the linear free surface case (\np{ln\_linssh}\forcode{=.true.}), an additional term has to be added on
 both temperature and salinity.
 On temperature, this term remove the heat content associated with mass exchange that has been added to $Q_{ns}$.
@@ -737 +743 @@
 The resulting surface boundary condition is applied as follows:
 \begin{equation}
-  \label{eq:tra_sbc_lin}
+  \label{eq:TRA_sbc_lin}
   \begin{alignedat}{2}
     F^T &= \frac{1}{C_p} &\frac{1}{\rho_o \lt. e_{3t} \rt|_{k = 1}}
@@ -744 +750 @@
           &\overline{(\textit{sfx} -        \textit{emp} \lt. S \rt|_{k = 1})}^t
   \end{alignedat}
-\end{equation} 
+\end{equation}
 Note that an exact conservation of heat and salt content is only achieved with non-linear free surface.
 In the linear free surface case, there is a small imbalance.
-The imbalance is larger than the imbalance associated with the Asselin time filter \citep{Leclair_Madec_OM09}.
-This is the reason why the modified filter is not applied in the linear free surface case (see \autoref{chap:STP}).
-
-% -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-%        Solar Radiation Penetration 
-% -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-\subsection{Solar radiation penetration (\protect\mdl{traqsr})}
+The imbalance is larger than the imbalance associated with the Asselin time filter \citep{leclair.madec_OM09}.
+This is the reason why the modified filter is not applied in the linear free surface case (see \autoref{chap:TD}).
+
+% -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+%        Solar Radiation Penetration
+% -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+\subsection[Solar radiation penetration (\textit{traqsr.F90})]
+{Solar radiation penetration (\protect\mdl{traqsr})}
 \label{subsec:TRA_qsr}
 %--------------------------------------------namqsr--------------------------------------------------------
 
-\nlst{namtra_qsr}
+\begin{listing}
+  \nlst{namtra_qsr}
+  \caption{\texttt{namtra\_qsr}}
+  \label{lst:namtra_qsr}
+\end{listing}
 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
-Options are defined through the \ngn{namtra\_qsr} namelist variables.
-When the penetrative solar radiation option is used (\np{ln\_flxqsr}~\forcode{= .true.}),
+Options are defined through the \nam{tra\_qsr} namelist variables.
+When the penetrative solar radiation option is used (\np{ln\_traqsr}\forcode{=.true.}),
 the solar radiation penetrates the top few tens of meters of the ocean.
-If it is not used (\np{ln\_flxqsr}~\forcode{= .false.}) all the heat flux is absorbed in the first ocean level.
-Thus, in the former case a term is added to the time evolution equation of temperature \autoref{eq:PE_tra_T} and
-the surface boundary condition is modified to take into account only the non-penetrative part of the surface 
+If it is not used (\np{ln\_traqsr}\forcode{=.false.}) all the heat flux is absorbed in the first ocean level.
+Thus, in the former case a term is added to the time evolution equation of temperature \autoref{eq:MB_PE_tra_T} and
+the surface boundary condition is modified to take into account only the non-penetrative part of the surface
 heat flux:
 \begin{equation}
-  \label{eq:PE_qsr}
+  \label{eq:TRA_PE_qsr}
   \begin{gathered}
     \pd[T]{t} = \ldots + \frac{1}{\rho_o \, C_p \, e_3} \; \pd[I]{k} \\
@@ -774 +785 @@
   \end{gathered}
 \end{equation}
-where $Q_{sr}$ is the penetrative part of the surface heat flux (\ie the shortwave radiation) and
+where $Q_{sr}$ is the penetrative part of the surface heat flux (\ie\ the shortwave radiation) and
 $I$ is the downward irradiance ($\lt. I \rt|_{z = \eta} = Q_{sr}$).
-The additional term in \autoref{eq:PE_qsr} is discretized as follows:
-\begin{equation}
-  \label{eq:tra_qsr}
+The additional term in \autoref{eq:TRA_PE_qsr} is discretized as follows:
+\begin{equation}
+  \label{eq:TRA_qsr}
   \frac{1}{\rho_o \, C_p \, e_3} \, \pd[I]{k} \equiv \frac{1}{\rho_o \, C_p \, e_{3t}} \delta_k [I_w]
 \end{equation}
@@ -788 +799 @@
 (specified through namelist parameter \np{rn\_abs}).
 It is assumed to penetrate the ocean with a decreasing exponential profile, with an e-folding depth scale, $\xi_0$,
-of a few tens of centimetres (typically $\xi_0 = 0.35~m$ set as \np{rn\_si0} in the \ngn{namtra\_qsr} namelist).
+of a few tens of centimetres (typically $\xi_0 = 0.35~m$ set as \np{rn\_si0} in the \nam{tra\_qsr} namelist).
 For shorter wavelengths (400-700~nm), the ocean is more transparent, and solar energy propagates to
 larger depths where it contributes to local heating.
 The way this second part of the solar energy penetrates into the ocean depends on which formulation is chosen.
-In the simple 2-waveband light penetration scheme (\np{ln\_qsr\_2bd}~\forcode{= .true.})
+In the simple 2-waveband light penetration scheme (\np{ln\_qsr\_2bd}\forcode{=.true.})
 a chlorophyll-independent monochromatic formulation is chosen for the shorter wavelengths,
-leading to the following expression \citep{Paulson1977}:
+leading to the following expression \citep{paulson.simpson_JPO77}:
 \[
-  % \label{eq:traqsr_iradiance}
+  % \label{eq:TRA_qsr_iradiance}
   I(z) = Q_{sr} \lt[ Re^{- z / \xi_0} + (1 - R) e^{- z / \xi_1} \rt]
 \]
@@ -805 +816 @@
 
 Such assumptions have been shown to provide a very crude and simplistic representation of
-observed light penetration profiles (\cite{Morel_JGR88}, see also \autoref{fig:traqsr_irradiance}).
+observed light penetration profiles (\cite{morel_JGR88}, see also \autoref{fig:TRA_qsr_irradiance}).
 Light absorption in the ocean depends on particle concentration and is spectrally selective.
-\cite{Morel_JGR88} has shown that an accurate representation of light penetration can be provided by
+\cite{morel_JGR88} has shown that an accurate representation of light penetration can be provided by
 a 61 waveband formulation.
 Unfortunately, such a model is very computationally expensive.
-Thus, \cite{Lengaigne_al_CD07} have constructed a simplified version of this formulation in which
+Thus, \cite{lengaigne.menkes.ea_CD07} have constructed a simplified version of this formulation in which
 visible light is split into three wavebands: blue (400-500 nm), green (500-600 nm) and red (600-700nm).
 For each wave-band, the chlorophyll-dependent attenuation coefficient is fitted to the coefficients computed from
-the full spectral model of \cite{Morel_JGR88} (as modified by \cite{Morel_Maritorena_JGR01}),
+the full spectral model of \cite{morel_JGR88} (as modified by \cite{morel.maritorena_JGR01}),
 assuming the same power-law relationship.
-As shown in \autoref{fig:traqsr_irradiance}, this formulation, called RGB (Red-Green-Blue),
+As shown in \autoref{fig:TRA_qsr_irradiance}, this formulation, called RGB (Red-Green-Blue),
 reproduces quite closely the light penetration profiles predicted by the full spectal model,
 but with much greater computational efficiency.
 The 2-bands formulation does not reproduce the full model very well.
 
-The RGB formulation is used when \np{ln\_qsr\_rgb}~\forcode{= .true.}.
-The RGB attenuation coefficients (\ie the inverses of the extinction length scales) are tabulated over
+The RGB formulation is used when \np{ln\_qsr\_rgb}\forcode{=.true.}.
+The RGB attenuation coefficients (\ie\ the inverses of the extinction length scales) are tabulated over
 61 nonuniform chlorophyll classes ranging from 0.01 to 10 g.Chl/L
 (see the routine \rou{trc\_oce\_rgb} in \mdl{trc\_oce} module).
@@ -827 +838 @@
 
 \begin{description}
-\item[\np{nn\_chdta}~\forcode{= 0}]
-  a constant 0.05 g.Chl/L value everywhere ; 
-\item[\np{nn\_chdta}~\forcode{= 1}]
+\item[\np{nn\_chldta}\forcode{=0}]
+  a constant 0.05 g.Chl/L value everywhere ;
+\item[\np{nn\_chldta}\forcode{=1}]
   an observed time varying chlorophyll deduced from satellite surface ocean color measurement spread uniformly in
   the vertical direction;
-\item[\np{nn\_chdta}~\forcode{= 2}]
+\item[\np{nn\_chldta}\forcode{=2}]
   same as previous case except that a vertical profile of chlorophyl is used.
-  Following \cite{Morel_Berthon_LO89}, the profile is computed from the local surface chlorophyll value;
-\item[\np{ln\_qsr\_bio}~\forcode{= .true.}]
+  Following \cite{morel.berthon_LO89}, the profile is computed from the local surface chlorophyll value;
+\item[\np{ln\_qsr\_bio}\forcode{=.true.}]
   simulated time varying chlorophyll by TOP biogeochemical model.
   In this case, the RGB formulation is used to calculate both the phytoplankton light limitation in
-  PISCES or LOBSTER and the oceanic heating rate.
-\end{description} 
-
-The trend in \autoref{eq:tra_qsr} associated with the penetration of the solar radiation is added to
+  PISCES and the oceanic heating rate.
+\end{description}
+
+The trend in \autoref{eq:TRA_qsr} associated with the penetration of the solar radiation is added to
 the temperature trend, and the surface heat flux is modified in routine \mdl{traqsr}.
 
@@ -847 +858 @@
 the depth of $w-$levels does not significantly vary with location.
 The level at which the light has been totally absorbed
-(\ie it is less than the computer precision) is computed once,
+(\ie\ it is less than the computer precision) is computed once,
 and the trend associated with the penetration of the solar radiation is only added down to that level.
 Finally, note that when the ocean is shallow ($<$ 200~m), part of the solar radiation can reach the ocean floor.
 In this case, we have chosen that all remaining radiation is absorbed in the last ocean level
-(\ie $I$ is masked).
+(\ie\ $I$ is masked).
 
 %>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
 \begin{figure}[!t]
-  \begin{center}
-    \includegraphics[]{Fig_TRA_Irradiance}
-    \caption{
-      \protect\label{fig:traqsr_irradiance}
-      Penetration profile of the downward solar irradiance calculated by four models.
-      Two waveband chlorophyll-independent formulation (blue),
-      a chlorophyll-dependent monochromatic formulation (green),
-      4 waveband RGB formulation (red),
-      61 waveband Morel (1988) formulation (black) for a chlorophyll concentration of
-      (a) Chl=0.05 mg/m$^3$ and (b) Chl=0.5 mg/m$^3$.
-      From \citet{Lengaigne_al_CD07}.
-    }
-  \end{center}
+  \centering
+  \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Fig_TRA_Irradiance}
+  \caption[Penetration profile of the downward solar irradiance calculated by four models]{
+    Penetration profile of the downward solar irradiance calculated by four models.
+    Two waveband chlorophyll-independent formulation (blue),
+    a chlorophyll-dependent monochromatic formulation (green),
+    4 waveband RGB formulation (red),
+    61 waveband Morel (1988) formulation (black) for a chlorophyll concentration of
+    (a) Chl=0.05 mg/m$^3$ and (b) Chl=0.5 mg/m$^3$.
+    From \citet{lengaigne.menkes.ea_CD07}.}
+  \label{fig:TRA_qsr_irradiance}
 \end{figure}
 %>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
@@ -874 +883 @@
 %        Bottom Boundary Condition
 % -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-\subsection{Bottom boundary condition (\protect\mdl{trabbc})}
+\subsection[Bottom boundary condition (\textit{trabbc.F90}) - \forcode{ln_trabbc=.true.})]
+{Bottom boundary condition (\protect\mdl{trabbc})}
 \label{subsec:TRA_bbc}
 %--------------------------------------------nambbc--------------------------------------------------------
 
-\nlst{nambbc}
+\begin{listing}
+  \nlst{nambbc}
+  \caption{\texttt{nambbc}}
+  \label{lst:nambbc}
+\end{listing}
 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 %>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
 \begin{figure}[!t]
-  \begin{center}
-    \includegraphics[]{Fig_TRA_geoth}
-    \caption{
-      \protect\label{fig:geothermal}
-      Geothermal Heat flux (in $mW.m^{-2}$) used by \cite{Emile-Geay_Madec_OS09}.
-      It is inferred from the age of the sea floor and the formulae of \citet{Stein_Stein_Nat92}.
-    }
-  \end{center}
+  \centering
+  \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Fig_TRA_geoth}
+  \caption[Geothermal heat flux]{
+    Geothermal Heat flux (in $mW.m^{-2}$) used by \cite{emile-geay.madec_OS09}.
+    It is inferred from the age of the sea floor and the formulae of \citet{stein.stein_N92}.}
+  \label{fig:TRA_geothermal}
 \end{figure}
 %>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
 
 Usually it is assumed that there is no exchange of heat or salt through the ocean bottom,
-\ie a no flux boundary condition is applied on active tracers at the bottom.
+\ie\ a no flux boundary condition is applied on active tracers at the bottom.
 This is the default option in \NEMO, and it is implemented using the masking technique.
 However, there is a non-zero heat flux across the seafloor that is associated with solid earth cooling.
-This flux is weak compared to surface fluxes (a mean global value of $\sim 0.1 \, W/m^2$ \citep{Stein_Stein_Nat92}),
+This flux is weak compared to surface fluxes (a mean global value of $\sim 0.1 \, W/m^2$ \citep{stein.stein_N92}),
 but it warms systematically the ocean and acts on the densest water masses.
 Taking this flux into account in a global ocean model increases the deepest overturning cell
-(\ie the one associated with the Antarctic Bottom Water) by a few Sverdrups \citep{Emile-Geay_Madec_OS09}.
-
-Options are defined through the  \ngn{namtra\_bbc} namelist variables.
+(\ie\ the one associated with the Antarctic Bottom Water) by a few Sverdrups \citep{emile-geay.madec_OS09}.
+
+Options are defined through the \nam{bbc} namelist variables.
 The presence of geothermal heating is controlled by setting the namelist parameter \np{ln\_trabbc} to true.
 Then, when \np{nn\_geoflx} is set to 1, a constant geothermal heating is introduced whose value is given by
-the \np{nn\_geoflx\_cst}, which is also a namelist parameter.
+the \np{rn\_geoflx\_cst}, which is also a namelist parameter.
 When \np{nn\_geoflx} is set to 2, a spatially varying geothermal heat flux is introduced which is provided in
-the \ifile{geothermal\_heating} NetCDF file (\autoref{fig:geothermal}) \citep{Emile-Geay_Madec_OS09}.
+the \ifile{geothermal\_heating} NetCDF file (\autoref{fig:TRA_geothermal}) \citep{emile-geay.madec_OS09}.
 
 % ================================================================
 % Bottom Boundary Layer
 % ================================================================
-\section{Bottom boundary layer (\protect\mdl{trabbl} - \protect\key{trabbl})}
+\section[Bottom boundary layer (\textit{trabbl.F90} - \forcode{ln_trabbl=.true.})]
+{Bottom boundary layer (\protect\mdl{trabbl} - \protect\np{ln\_trabbl}\forcode{=.true.})}
 \label{sec:TRA_bbl}
 %--------------------------------------------nambbl---------------------------------------------------------
 
-\nlst{nambbl}
+\begin{listing}
+  \nlst{nambbl}
+  \caption{\texttt{nambbl}}
+  \label{lst:nambbl}
+\end{listing}
 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
-Options are defined through the \ngn{nambbl} namelist variables.
+Options are defined through the \nam{bbl} namelist variables.
 In a $z$-coordinate configuration, the bottom topography is represented by a series of discrete steps.
 This is not adequate to represent gravity driven downslope flows.
@@ -931 +948 @@
 sometimes over a thickness much larger than the thickness of the observed gravity plume.
 A similar problem occurs in the $s$-coordinate when the thickness of the bottom level varies rapidly downstream of
-a sill \citep{Willebrand_al_PO01}, and the thickness of the plume is not resolved.
-
-The idea of the bottom boundary layer (BBL) parameterisation, first introduced by \citet{Beckmann_Doscher1997},
+a sill \citep{willebrand.barnier.ea_PO01}, and the thickness of the plume is not resolved.
+
+The idea of the bottom boundary layer (BBL) parameterisation, first introduced by \citet{beckmann.doscher_JPO97},
 is to allow a direct communication between two adjacent bottom cells at different levels,
 whenever the densest water is located above the less dense water.
@@ -939 +956 @@
 In the current implementation of the BBL, only the tracers are modified, not the velocities.
 Furthermore, it only connects ocean bottom cells, and therefore does not include all the improvements introduced by
-\citet{Campin_Goosse_Tel99}.
+\citet{campin.goosse_T99}.
 
 % -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 %        Diffusive BBL
 % -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-\subsection{Diffusive bottom boundary layer (\protect\np{nn\_bbl\_ldf}~\forcode{= 1})}
+\subsection[Diffusive bottom boundary layer (\forcode{nn_bbl_ldf=1})]
+{Diffusive bottom boundary layer (\protect\np{nn\_bbl\_ldf}\forcode{=1})}
 \label{subsec:TRA_bbl_diff}
 
-When applying sigma-diffusion (\key{trabbl} defined and \np{nn\_bbl\_ldf} set to 1),
-the diffusive flux between two adjacent cells at the ocean floor is given by 
+When applying sigma-diffusion (\np{ln\_trabbl}\forcode{=.true.} and \np{nn\_bbl\_ldf} set to 1),
+the diffusive flux between two adjacent cells at the ocean floor is given by
 \[
-  % \label{eq:tra_bbl_diff}
+  % \label{eq:TRA_bbl_diff}
   \vect F_\sigma = A_l^\sigma \, \nabla_\sigma T
 \]
 with $\nabla_\sigma$ the lateral gradient operator taken between bottom cells, and
 $A_l^\sigma$ the lateral diffusivity in the BBL.
-Following \citet{Beckmann_Doscher1997}, the latter is prescribed with a spatial dependence,
-\ie in the conditional form
-\begin{equation}
-  \label{eq:tra_bbl_coef}
+Following \citet{beckmann.doscher_JPO97}, the latter is prescribed with a spatial dependence,
+\ie\ in the conditional form
+\begin{equation}
+  \label{eq:TRA_bbl_coef}
   A_l^\sigma (i,j,t) =
       \begin{cases}
@@ -968 +986 @@
 where $A_{bbl}$ is the BBL diffusivity coefficient, given by the namelist parameter \np{rn\_ahtbbl} and
 usually set to a value much larger than the one used for lateral mixing in the open ocean.
-The constraint in \autoref{eq:tra_bbl_coef} implies that sigma-like diffusion only occurs when
+The constraint in \autoref{eq:TRA_bbl_coef} implies that sigma-like diffusion only occurs when
 the density above the sea floor, at the top of the slope, is larger than in the deeper ocean
-(see green arrow in \autoref{fig:bbl}).
+(see green arrow in \autoref{fig:TRA_bbl}).
 In practice, this constraint is applied separately in the two horizontal directions,
-and the density gradient in \autoref{eq:tra_bbl_coef} is evaluated with the log gradient formulation: 
+and the density gradient in \autoref{eq:TRA_bbl_coef} is evaluated with the log gradient formulation:
 \[
-  % \label{eq:tra_bbl_Drho}
+  % \label{eq:TRA_bbl_Drho}
   \nabla_\sigma \rho / \rho = \alpha \, \nabla_\sigma T + \beta \, \nabla_\sigma S
 \]
@@ -983 +1001 @@
 %        Advective BBL
 % -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-\subsection{Advective bottom boundary layer  (\protect\np{nn\_bbl\_adv}~\forcode{= 1..2})}
+\subsection[Advective bottom boundary layer (\forcode{nn_bbl_adv=[12]})]
+{Advective bottom boundary layer (\protect\np{nn\_bbl\_adv}\forcode{=[12]})}
 \label{subsec:TRA_bbl_adv}
 
@@ -993 +1012 @@
 %>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
 \begin{figure}[!t]
-  \begin{center}
-    \includegraphics[]{Fig_BBL_adv}
-    \caption{
-      \protect\label{fig:bbl}
-      Advective/diffusive Bottom Boundary Layer.
-      The BBL parameterisation is activated when $\rho^i_{kup}$ is larger than $\rho^{i + 1}_{kdnw}$.
-      Red arrows indicate the additional overturning circulation due to the advective BBL.
-      The transport of the downslope flow is defined either as the transport of the bottom ocean cell (black arrow),
-      or as a function of the along slope density gradient.
-      The green arrow indicates the diffusive BBL flux directly connecting $kup$ and $kdwn$ ocean bottom cells.
-    }
-  \end{center}
+  \centering
+  \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Fig_BBL_adv}
+  \caption[Advective/diffusive bottom boundary layer]{
+    Advective/diffusive Bottom Boundary Layer.
+    The BBL parameterisation is activated when $\rho^i_{kup}$ is larger than $\rho^{i + 1}_{kdnw}$.
+    Red arrows indicate the additional overturning circulation due to the advective BBL.
+    The transport of the downslope flow is defined either
+    as the transport of the bottom ocean cell (black arrow),
+    or as a function of the along slope density gradient.
+    The green arrow indicates the diffusive BBL flux directly connecting
+    $kup$ and $kdwn$ ocean bottom cells.}
+  \label{fig:TRA_bbl}
 \end{figure}
 %>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
@@ -1014 +1033 @@
 %%%gmcomment   :  this section has to be really written
 
-When applying an advective BBL (\np{nn\_bbl\_adv}~\forcode{= 1..2}), an overturning circulation is added which
+When applying an advective BBL (\np{nn\_bbl\_adv}\forcode{=1..2}), an overturning circulation is added which
 connects two adjacent bottom grid-points only if dense water overlies less dense water on the slope.
 The density difference causes dense water to move down the slope.
 
-\np{nn\_bbl\_adv}~\forcode{= 1}:
+\np{nn\_bbl\_adv}\forcode{=1}:
 the downslope velocity is chosen to be the Eulerian ocean velocity just above the topographic step
-(see black arrow in \autoref{fig:bbl}) \citep{Beckmann_Doscher1997}.
+(see black arrow in \autoref{fig:TRA_bbl}) \citep{beckmann.doscher_JPO97}.
 It is a \textit{conditional advection}, that is, advection is allowed only
-if dense water overlies less dense water on the slope (\ie $\nabla_\sigma \rho \cdot \nabla H < 0$) and
-if the velocity is directed towards greater depth (\ie $\vect U \cdot \nabla H > 0$).
-
-\np{nn\_bbl\_adv}~\forcode{= 2}:
+if dense water overlies less dense water on the slope (\ie\ $\nabla_\sigma \rho \cdot \nabla H < 0$) and
+if the velocity is directed towards greater depth (\ie\ $\vect U \cdot \nabla H > 0$).
+
+\np{nn\_bbl\_adv}\forcode{=2}:
 the downslope velocity is chosen to be proportional to $\Delta \rho$,
-the density difference between the higher cell and lower cell densities \citep{Campin_Goosse_Tel99}.
+the density difference between the higher cell and lower cell densities \citep{campin.goosse_T99}.
 The advection is allowed only  if dense water overlies less dense water on the slope
-(\ie $\nabla_\sigma \rho \cdot \nabla H < 0$).
-For example, the resulting transport of the downslope flow, here in the $i$-direction (\autoref{fig:bbl}),
+(\ie\ $\nabla_\sigma \rho \cdot \nabla H < 0$).
+For example, the resulting transport of the downslope flow, here in the $i$-direction (\autoref{fig:TRA_bbl}),
 is simply given by the following expression:
 \[
-  % \label{eq:bbl_Utr}
+  % \label{eq:TRA_bbl_Utr}
   u^{tr}_{bbl} = \gamma g \frac{\Delta \rho}{\rho_o} e_{1u} \, min ({e_{3u}}_{kup},{e_{3u}}_{kdwn})
 \]
@@ -1041 +1060 @@
 The parameter $\gamma$ should take a different value for each bathymetric step, but for simplicity,
 and because no direct estimation of this parameter is available, a uniform value has been assumed.
-The possible values for $\gamma$ range between 1 and $10~s$ \citep{Campin_Goosse_Tel99}.
+The possible values for $\gamma$ range between 1 and $10~s$ \citep{campin.goosse_T99}.
 
 Scalar properties are advected by this additional transport $(u^{tr}_{bbl},v^{tr}_{bbl})$ using the upwind scheme.
@@ -1047 +1066 @@
 the surrounding water at intermediate depths.
 The entrainment is replaced by the vertical mixing implicit in the advection scheme.
-Let us consider as an example the case displayed in \autoref{fig:bbl} where
+Let us consider as an example the case displayed in \autoref{fig:TRA_bbl} where
 the density at level $(i,kup)$ is larger than the one at level $(i,kdwn)$.
 The advective BBL scheme modifies the tracer time tendency of the ocean cells near the topographic step by
-the downslope flow \autoref{eq:bbl_dw}, the horizontal \autoref{eq:bbl_hor} and
-the upward \autoref{eq:bbl_up} return flows as follows: 
+the downslope flow \autoref{eq:TRA_bbl_dw}, the horizontal \autoref{eq:TRA_bbl_hor} and
+the upward \autoref{eq:TRA_bbl_up} return flows as follows:
 \begin{alignat}{3}
-  \label{eq:bbl_dw}
+  \label{eq:TRA_bbl_dw}
   \partial_t T^{do}_{kdw} &\equiv \partial_t T^{do}_{kdw}
                                 &&+ \frac{u^{tr}_{bbl}}{{b_t}^{do}_{kdw}} &&\lt( T^{sh}_{kup} - T^{do}_{kdw} \rt) \\
-  \label{eq:bbl_hor}
+  \label{eq:TRA_bbl_hor}
   \partial_t T^{sh}_{kup} &\equiv \partial_t T^{sh}_{kup}
                                 &&+ \frac{u^{tr}_{bbl}}{{b_t}^{sh}_{kup}} &&\lt( T^{do}_{kup} - T^{sh}_{kup} \rt) \\
@@ -1062 +1081 @@
   \intertext{and for $k =kdw-1,\;..., \; kup$ :}
   %
-  \label{eq:bbl_up}
+  \label{eq:TRA_bbl_up}
   \partial_t T^{do}_{k} &\equiv \partial_t S^{do}_{k}
                                 &&+ \frac{u^{tr}_{bbl}}{{b_t}^{do}_{k}}   &&\lt( T^{do}_{k +1} - T^{sh}_{k}   \rt)
@@ -1074 +1093 @@
 % Tracer damping
 % ================================================================
-\section{Tracer damping (\protect\mdl{tradmp})}
+\section[Tracer damping (\textit{tradmp.F90})]
+{Tracer damping (\protect\mdl{tradmp})}
 \label{sec:TRA_dmp}
 %--------------------------------------------namtra_dmp-------------------------------------------------
 
-\nlst{namtra_dmp}
+\begin{listing}
+  \nlst{namtra_dmp}
+  \caption{\texttt{namtra\_dmp}}
+  \label{lst:namtra_dmp}
+\end{listing}
 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
 In some applications it can be useful to add a Newtonian damping term into the temperature and salinity equations:
 \begin{equation}
-  \label{eq:tra_dmp}
+  \label{eq:TRA_dmp}
   \begin{gathered}
     \pd[T]{t} = \cdots - \gamma (T - T_o) \\
     \pd[S]{t} = \cdots - \gamma (S - S_o)
   \end{gathered}
-\end{equation} 
+\end{equation}
 where $\gamma$ is the inverse of a time scale, and $T_o$ and $S_o$ are given temperature and salinity fields
 (usually a climatology).
-Options are defined through the  \ngn{namtra\_dmp} namelist variables.
+Options are defined through the  \nam{tra\_dmp} namelist variables.
 The restoring term is added when the namelist parameter \np{ln\_tradmp} is set to true.
-It also requires that both \np{ln\_tsd\_init} and \np{ln\_tsd\_tradmp} are set to true in
-\ngn{namtsd} namelist as well as \np{sn\_tem} and \np{sn\_sal} structures are correctly set
-(\ie that $T_o$ and $S_o$ are provided in input files and read using \mdl{fldread},
+It also requires that both \np{ln\_tsd\_init} and \np{ln\_tsd\_dmp} are set to true in
+\nam{tsd} namelist as well as \np{sn\_tem} and \np{sn\_sal} structures are correctly set
+(\ie\ that $T_o$ and $S_o$ are provided in input files and read using \mdl{fldread},
 see \autoref{subsec:SBC_fldread}).
 The restoring coefficient $\gamma$ is a three-dimensional array read in during the \rou{tra\_dmp\_init} routine.
@@ -1101 +1125 @@
 The DMP\_TOOLS tool is provided to allow users to generate the netcdf file.
 
-The two main cases in which \autoref{eq:tra_dmp} is used are
+The two main cases in which \autoref{eq:TRA_dmp} is used are
 \textit{(a)} the specification of the boundary conditions along artificial walls of a limited domain basin and
 \textit{(b)} the computation of the velocity field associated with a given $T$-$S$ field
@@ -1109 +1133 @@
 In the vicinity of these walls, $\gamma$ takes large values (equivalent to a time scale of a few days) whereas
 it is zero in the interior of the model domain.
-The second case corresponds to the use of the robust diagnostic method \citep{Sarmiento1982}.
+The second case corresponds to the use of the robust diagnostic method \citep{sarmiento.bryan_JGR82}.
 It allows us to find the velocity field consistent with the model dynamics whilst
 having a $T$, $S$ field close to a given climatological field ($T_o$, $S_o$).
@@ -1121 +1145 @@
 only below the mixed layer (defined either on a density or $S_o$ criterion).
 It is common to set the damping to zero in the mixed layer as the adjustment time scale is short here
-\citep{Madec_al_JPO96}.
+\citep{madec.delecluse.ea_JPO96}.
 
 For generating \ifile{resto}, see the documentation for the DMP tool provided with the source code under
@@ -1129 +1153 @@
 % Tracer time evolution
 % ================================================================
-\section{Tracer time evolution (\protect\mdl{tranxt})}
+\section[Tracer time evolution (\textit{tranxt.F90})]
+{Tracer time evolution (\protect\mdl{tranxt})}
 \label{sec:TRA_nxt}
 %--------------------------------------------namdom-----------------------------------------------------
-
-\nlst{namdom}
 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
-Options are defined through the \ngn{namdom} namelist variables.
-The general framework for tracer time stepping is a modified leap-frog scheme \citep{Leclair_Madec_OM09},
-\ie a three level centred time scheme associated with a Asselin time filter (cf. \autoref{sec:STP_mLF}):
-\begin{equation}
-  \label{eq:tra_nxt}
+Options are defined through the \nam{dom} namelist variables.
+The general framework for tracer time stepping is a modified leap-frog scheme \citep{leclair.madec_OM09},
+\ie\ a three level centred time scheme associated with a Asselin time filter (cf. \autoref{sec:TD_mLF}):
+\begin{equation}
+  \label{eq:TRA_nxt}
   \begin{alignedat}{3}
     &(e_{3t}T)^{t + \rdt} &&= (e_{3t}T)_f^{t - \rdt} &&+ 2 \, \rdt \,e_{3t}^t \ \text{RHS}^t \\
     &(e_{3t}T)_f^t        &&= (e_{3t}T)^t            &&+ \, \gamma \, \lt[ (e_{3t}T)_f^{t - \rdt} - 2(e_{3t}T)^t + (e_{3t}T)^{t + \rdt} \rt] \\
-    &                     &&                         &&- \, \gamma \, \rdt \, \lt[ Q^{t + \rdt/2} - Q^{t - \rdt/2} \rt]  
+    &                     &&                         &&- \, \gamma \, \rdt \, \lt[ Q^{t + \rdt/2} - Q^{t - \rdt/2} \rt]
   \end{alignedat}
-\end{equation} 
+\end{equation}
 where RHS is the right hand side of the temperature equation, the subscript $f$ denotes filtered values,
 $\gamma$ is the Asselin coefficient, and $S$ is the total forcing applied on $T$
-(\ie fluxes plus content in mass exchanges).
+(\ie\ fluxes plus content in mass exchanges).
 $\gamma$ is initialized as \np{rn\_atfp} (\textbf{namelist} parameter).
-Its default value is \np{rn\_atfp}~\forcode{= 10.e-3}.
+Its default value is \np{rn\_atfp}\forcode{=10.e-3}.
 Note that the forcing correction term in the filter is not applied in linear free surface
-(\jp{lk\_vvl}~\forcode{= .false.}) (see \autoref{subsec:TRA_sbc}).
+(\jp{ln\_linssh}\forcode{=.true.}) (see \autoref{subsec:TRA_sbc}).
 Not also that in constant volume case, the time stepping is performed on $T$, not on its content, $e_{3t}T$.
 
@@ -1164 +1187 @@
 
 % ================================================================
-% Equation of State (eosbn2) 
-% ================================================================
-\section{Equation of state (\protect\mdl{eosbn2}) }
+% Equation of State (eosbn2)
+% ================================================================
+\section[Equation of state (\textit{eosbn2.F90})]
+{Equation of state (\protect\mdl{eosbn2})}
 \label{sec:TRA_eosbn2}
 %--------------------------------------------nameos-----------------------------------------------------
 
-\nlst{nameos}
+\begin{listing}
+  \nlst{nameos}
+  \caption{\texttt{nameos}}
+  \label{lst:nameos}
+\end{listing}
 %--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
@@ -1176 +1204 @@
 %        Equation of State
 % -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-\subsection{Equation of seawater (\protect\np{nn\_eos}~\forcode{= -1..1})}
+\subsection[Equation of seawater (\texttt{ln}\{\texttt{\_teso10,\_eos80,\_seos}\})]
+{Equation of seawater (\protect\np{ln\_teos10}, \protect\np{ln\_teos80}, or \protect\np{ln\_seos}) }
 \label{subsec:TRA_eos}
+
 
 The Equation Of Seawater (EOS) is an empirical nonlinear thermodynamic relationship linking seawater density,
@@ -1186 +1216 @@
 Nonlinearities of the EOS are of major importance, in particular influencing the circulation through
 determination of the static stability below the mixed layer,
-thus controlling rates of exchange between the atmosphere and the ocean interior \citep{Roquet_JPO2015}.
-Therefore an accurate EOS based on either the 1980 equation of state (EOS-80, \cite{UNESCO1983}) or
-TEOS-10 \citep{TEOS10} standards should be used anytime a simulation of the real ocean circulation is attempted
-\citep{Roquet_JPO2015}.
+thus controlling rates of exchange between the atmosphere and the ocean interior \citep{roquet.madec.ea_JPO15}.
+Therefore an accurate EOS based on either the 1980 equation of state (EOS-80, \cite{fofonoff.millard_bk83}) or
+TEOS-10 \citep{ioc.iapso_bk10} standards should be used anytime a simulation of the real ocean circulation is attempted
+\citep{roquet.madec.ea_JPO15}.
 The use of TEOS-10 is highly recommended because
 \textit{(i)}   it is the new official EOS,
 \textit{(ii)}  it is more accurate, being based on an updated database of laboratory measurements, and
 \textit{(iii)} it uses Conservative Temperature and Absolute Salinity (instead of potential temperature and
-practical salinity for EOS-980, both variables being more suitable for use as model variables
-\citep{TEOS10, Graham_McDougall_JPO13}.
-EOS-80 is an obsolescent feature of the NEMO system, kept only for backward compatibility.
+practical salinity for EOS-80, both variables being more suitable for use as model variables
+\citep{ioc.iapso_bk10, graham.mcdougall_JPO13}.
+EOS-80 is an obsolescent feature of the \NEMO\ system, kept only for backward compatibility.
 For process studies, it is often convenient to use an approximation of the EOS.
-To that purposed, a simplified EOS (S-EOS) inspired by \citet{Vallis06} is also available.
+To that purposed, a simplified EOS (S-EOS) inspired by \citet{vallis_bk06} is also available.
 
 In the computer code, a density anomaly, $d_a = \rho / \rho_o - 1$, is computed, with $\rho_o$ a reference density.
@@ -1204 +1234 @@
 This is a sensible choice for the reference density used in a Boussinesq ocean climate model, as,
 with the exception of only a small percentage of the ocean,
-density in the World Ocean varies by no more than 2$\%$ from that value \citep{Gill1982}.
-
-Options are defined through the \ngn{nameos} namelist variables, and in particular \np{nn\_eos} which
-controls the EOS used (\forcode{= -1} for TEOS10 ; \forcode{= 0} for EOS-80 ; \forcode{= 1} for S-EOS).
+density in the World Ocean varies by no more than 2$\%$ from that value \citep{gill_bk82}.
+
+Options which control the EOS used are defined through the \nam{eos} namelist variables.
 
 \begin{description}
-\item[\np{nn\_eos}~\forcode{= -1}]
-  the polyTEOS10-bsq equation of seawater \citep{Roquet_OM2015} is used.
+\item[\np{ln\_teos10}\forcode{=.true.}]
+  the polyTEOS10-bsq equation of seawater \citep{roquet.madec.ea_OM15} is used.
   The accuracy of this approximation is comparable to the TEOS-10 rational function approximation,
   but it is optimized for a boussinesq fluid and the polynomial expressions have simpler and
@@ -1217 +1246 @@
   use in ocean models.
   Note that a slightly higher precision polynomial form is now used replacement of
-  the TEOS-10 rational function approximation for hydrographic data analysis \citep{TEOS10}.
+  the TEOS-10 rational function approximation for hydrographic data analysis \citep{ioc.iapso_bk10}.
   A key point is that conservative state variables are used:
   Absolute Salinity (unit: g/kg, notation: $S_A$) and Conservative Temperature (unit: \deg{C}, notation: $\Theta$).
   The pressure in decibars is approximated by the depth in meters.
   With TEOS10, the specific heat capacity of sea water, $C_p$, is a constant.
-  It is set to $C_p = 3991.86795711963~J\,Kg^{-1}\,^{\circ}K^{-1}$, according to \citet{TEOS10}.
+  It is set to $C_p = 3991.86795711963~J\,Kg^{-1}\,^{\circ}K^{-1}$, according to \citet{ioc.iapso_bk10}.
   Choosing polyTEOS10-bsq implies that the state variables used by the model are $\Theta$ and $S_A$.
   In particular, the initial state deined by the user have to be given as \textit{Conservative} Temperature and
   \textit{Absolute} Salinity.
-  In addition, setting \np{ln\_useCT} to \forcode{.true.} convert the Conservative SST to potential SST prior to
+  In addition, when using TEOS10, the Conservative SST is converted to potential SST prior to
   either computing the air-sea and ice-sea fluxes (forced mode) or
   sending the SST field to the atmosphere (coupled mode).
-\item[\np{nn\_eos}~\forcode{= 0}]
+\item[\np{ln\_eos80}\forcode{=.true.}]
   the polyEOS80-bsq equation of seawater is used.
   It takes the same polynomial form as the polyTEOS10, but the coefficients have been optimized to
@@ -1238 +1267 @@
   The pressure in decibars is approximated by the depth in meters.
   With thsi EOS, the specific heat capacity of sea water, $C_p$, is a function of temperature, salinity and
-  pressure \citep{UNESCO1983}.
+  pressure \citep{fofonoff.millard_bk83}.
   Nevertheless, a severe assumption is made in order to have a heat content ($C_p T_p$) which
   is conserved by the model: $C_p$ is set to a constant value, the TEOS10 value.
-\item[\np{nn\_eos}~\forcode{= 1}]
-  a simplified EOS (S-EOS) inspired by \citet{Vallis06} is chosen,
+\item[\np{ln\_seos}\forcode{=.true.}]
+  a simplified EOS (S-EOS) inspired by \citet{vallis_bk06} is chosen,
   the coefficients of which has been optimized to fit the behavior of TEOS10
-  (Roquet, personal comm.) (see also \citet{Roquet_JPO2015}).
+  (Roquet, personal comm.) (see also \citet{roquet.madec.ea_JPO15}).
   It provides a simplistic linear representation of both cabbeling and thermobaricity effects which
-  is enough for a proper treatment of the EOS in theoretical studies \citep{Roquet_JPO2015}.
+  is enough for a proper treatment of the EOS in theoretical studies \citep{roquet.madec.ea_JPO15}.
   With such an equation of state there is no longer a distinction between
   \textit{conservative} and \textit{potential} temperature,
   as well as between \textit{absolute} and \textit{practical} salinity.
   S-EOS takes the following expression:
+
   \begin{gather*}
-    % \label{eq:tra_S-EOS}
+    % \label{eq:TRA_S-EOS}
     \begin{alignedat}{2}
     &d_a(T,S,z) = \frac{1}{\rho_o} \big[ &- a_0 \; ( 1 + 0.5 \; \lambda_1 \; T_a + \mu_1 \; z ) * &T_a \big. \\
-    &                                    &+ b_0 \; ( 1 - 0.5 \; \lambda_2 \; S_a - \mu_2 \; z ) * &S_a       \\  
+    &                                    &+ b_0 \; ( 1 - 0.5 \; \lambda_2 \; S_a - \mu_2 \; z ) * &S_a       \\
     &                              \big. &- \nu \;                           T_a                  &S_a \big] \\
     \end{alignedat}
@@ -1261 +1291 @@
     \text{with~} T_a = T - 10 \, ; \, S_a = S - 35 \, ; \, \rho_o = 1026~Kg/m^3
   \end{gather*}
-  where the computer name of the coefficients as well as their standard value are given in \autoref{tab:SEOS}.
+  where the computer name of the coefficients as well as their standard value are given in \autoref{tab:TRA_SEOS}.
   In fact, when choosing S-EOS, various approximation of EOS can be specified simply by
   changing the associated coefficients.
@@ -1272 +1302 @@
 %>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
 \begin{table}[!tb]
-  \begin{center}
-    \begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|l|}
-      \hline
-      coeff.      & computer name   & S-EOS           & description                      \\
-      \hline
-      $a_0$       & \np{rn\_a0}     & $1.6550~10^{-1}$ & linear thermal expansion coeff. \\
-      \hline
-      $b_0$       & \np{rn\_b0}     & $7.6554~10^{-1}$ & linear haline  expansion coeff. \\
-      \hline
-      $\lambda_1$ & \np{rn\_lambda1}& $5.9520~10^{-2}$ & cabbeling coeff. in $T^2$       \\
-      \hline
-      $\lambda_2$ & \np{rn\_lambda2}& $5.4914~10^{-4}$ & cabbeling coeff. in $S^2$       \\
-      \hline
-      $\nu$       & \np{rn\_nu}     & $2.4341~10^{-3}$ & cabbeling coeff. in $T \, S$    \\
-      \hline
-      $\mu_1$     & \np{rn\_mu1}    & $1.4970~10^{-4}$ & thermobaric coeff. in T         \\
-      \hline
-      $\mu_2$     & \np{rn\_mu2}    & $1.1090~10^{-5}$ & thermobaric coeff. in S         \\
-      \hline
-    \end{tabular}
-    \caption{
-      \protect\label{tab:SEOS}
-      Standard value of S-EOS coefficients.
-    }
-\end{center}
+  \centering
+  \begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|l|}
+    \hline
+    coeff.     & computer name   & S-EOS           & description                      \\
+    \hline
+    $a_0$       & \np{rn\_a0}     & $1.6550~10^{-1}$ & linear thermal expansion coeff. \\
+    \hline
+    $b_0$         & \np{rn\_b0}     & $7.6554~10^{-1}$ & linear haline  expansion coeff. \\
+    \hline
+    $\lambda_1$   & \np{rn\_lambda1}& $5.9520~10^{-2}$ & cabbeling coeff. in $T^2$       \\
+    \hline
+    $\lambda_2$   & \np{rn\_lambda2}& $5.4914~10^{-4}$ & cabbeling coeff. in $S^2$       \\
+    \hline
+    $\nu$       & \np{rn\_nu}     & $2.4341~10^{-3}$ & cabbeling coeff. in $T \, S$      \\
+    \hline
+    $\mu_1$     & \np{rn\_mu1}   & $1.4970~10^{-4}$ & thermobaric coeff. in T         \\
+    \hline
+    $\mu_2$     & \np{rn\_mu2}   & $1.1090~10^{-5}$ & thermobaric coeff. in S         \\
+    \hline
+  \end{tabular}
+  \caption{Standard value of S-EOS coefficients}
+  \label{tab:TRA_SEOS}
 \end{table}
 %>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
@@ -1303 +1330 @@
 %        Brunt-V\"{a}is\"{a}l\"{a} Frequency
 % -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-\subsection{Brunt-V\"{a}is\"{a}l\"{a} frequency (\protect\np{nn\_eos}~\forcode{= 0..2})}
+\subsection[Brunt-V\"{a}is\"{a}l\"{a} frequency]
+{Brunt-V\"{a}is\"{a}l\"{a} frequency}
 \label{subsec:TRA_bn2}
 
@@ -1312 +1340 @@
 In particular, $N^2$ has to be computed at the local pressure
 (pressure in decibar being approximated by the depth in meters).
-The expression for $N^2$  is given by: 
+The expression for $N^2$  is given by:
 \[
-  % \label{eq:tra_bn2}
+  % \label{eq:TRA_bn2}
   N^2 = \frac{g}{e_{3w}} \lt( \beta \; \delta_{k + 1/2}[S] - \alpha \; \delta_{k + 1/2}[T] \rt)
 \]
@@ -1321 +1349 @@
 The coefficients are a polynomial function of temperature, salinity and depth which expression depends on
 the chosen EOS.
-They are computed through \textit{eos\_rab}, a \fortran function that can be found in \mdl{eosbn2}.
+They are computed through \textit{eos\_rab}, a \fortran\ function that can be found in \mdl{eosbn2}.
 
 % -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@@ -1329 +1357 @@
 \label{subsec:TRA_fzp}
 
-The freezing point of seawater is a function of salinity and pressure \citep{UNESCO1983}:
-\begin{equation}
-  \label{eq:tra_eos_fzp}
+The freezing point of seawater is a function of salinity and pressure \citep{fofonoff.millard_bk83}:
+\begin{equation}
+  \label{eq:TRA_eos_fzp}
   \begin{split}
     &T_f (S,p) = \lt( a + b \, \sqrt{S} + c \, S \rt) \, S + d \, p \\
-    &\text{where~} a = -0.0575, \, b = 1.710523~10^{-3}, \, c = -2.154996~10^{-4} \\ 
+    &\text{where~} a = -0.0575, \, b = 1.710523~10^{-3}, \, c = -2.154996~10^{-4} \\
     &\text{and~} d = -7.53~10^{-3}
     \end{split}
 \end{equation}
 
-\autoref{eq:tra_eos_fzp} is only used to compute the potential freezing point of sea water
-(\ie referenced to the surface $p = 0$),
-thus the pressure dependent terms in \autoref{eq:tra_eos_fzp} (last term) have been dropped.
+\autoref{eq:TRA_eos_fzp} is only used to compute the potential freezing point of sea water
+(\ie\ referenced to the surface $p = 0$),
+thus the pressure dependent terms in \autoref{eq:TRA_eos_fzp} (last term) have been dropped.
 The freezing point is computed through \textit{eos\_fzp},
-a \fortran function that can be found in \mdl{eosbn2}.
-
-% -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-%        Potential Energy     
+a \fortran\ function that can be found in \mdl{eosbn2}.
+
+% -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+%        Potential Energy
 % -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 %\subsection{Potential Energy anomalies}
@@ -1355 +1383 @@
 
 % ================================================================
-% Horizontal Derivative in zps-coordinate 
-% ================================================================
-\section{Horizontal derivative in \textit{zps}-coordinate (\protect\mdl{zpshde})}
+% Horizontal Derivative in zps-coordinate
+% ================================================================
+\section[Horizontal derivative in \textit{zps}-coordinate (\textit{zpshde.F90})]
+{Horizontal derivative in \textit{zps}-coordinate (\protect\mdl{zpshde})}
 \label{sec:TRA_zpshde}
 
-\gmcomment{STEVEN: to be consistent with earlier discussion of differencing and averaging operators, 
+\gmcomment{STEVEN: to be consistent with earlier discussion of differencing and averaging operators,
 I've changed "derivative" to "difference" and "mean" to "average"}
 
-With partial cells (\np{ln\_zps}~\forcode{= .true.}) at bottom and top (\np{ln\_isfcav}~\forcode{= .true.}),
+With partial cells (\np{ln\_zps}\forcode{=.true.}) at bottom and top (\np{ln\_isfcav}\forcode{=.true.}),
 in general, tracers in horizontally adjacent cells live at different depths.
 Horizontal gradients of tracers are needed for horizontal diffusion (\mdl{traldf} module) and
 the hydrostatic pressure gradient calculations (\mdl{dynhpg} module).
-The partial cell properties at the top (\np{ln\_isfcav}~\forcode{= .true.}) are computed in the same way as
+The partial cell properties at the top (\np{ln\_isfcav}\forcode{=.true.}) are computed in the same way as
 for the bottom.
 So, only the bottom interpolation is explained below.
@@ -1373 +1402 @@
 Before taking horizontal gradients between the tracers next to the bottom,
 a linear interpolation in the vertical is used to approximate the deeper tracer as if
-it actually lived at the depth of the shallower tracer point (\autoref{fig:Partial_step_scheme}).
+it actually lived at the depth of the shallower tracer point (\autoref{fig:TRA_Partial_step_scheme}).
 For example, for temperature in the $i$-direction the needed interpolated temperature, $\widetilde T$, is:
 
 %>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
 \begin{figure}[!p]
-  \begin{center}
-    \includegraphics[]{Fig_partial_step_scheme}
-    \caption{
-      \protect\label{fig:Partial_step_scheme}
-      Discretisation of the horizontal difference and average of tracers in the $z$-partial step coordinate
-      (\protect\np{ln\_zps}~\forcode{= .true.}) in the case $(e3w_k^{i + 1} - e3w_k^i) > 0$.
-      A linear interpolation is used to estimate $\widetilde T_k^{i + 1}$,
-      the tracer value at the depth of the shallower tracer point of the two adjacent bottom $T$-points.
-      The horizontal difference is then given by: $\delta_{i + 1/2} T_k = \widetilde T_k^{\, i + 1} -T_k^{\, i}$ and
-      the average by: $\overline T_k^{\, i + 1/2} = (\widetilde T_k^{\, i + 1/2} - T_k^{\, i}) / 2$.
-    }
-  \end{center}
+  \centering
+  \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Fig_partial_step_scheme}
+  \caption[Discretisation of the horizontal difference and average of tracers in
+  the $z$-partial step coordinate]{
+    Discretisation of the horizontal difference and average of tracers in
+    the $z$-partial step coordinate (\protect\np{ln\_zps}\forcode{=.true.}) in
+    the case $(e3w_k^{i + 1} - e3w_k^i) > 0$.
+    A linear interpolation is used to estimate $\widetilde T_k^{i + 1}$,
+    the tracer value at the depth of the shallower tracer point of
+    the two adjacent bottom $T$-points.
+    The horizontal difference is then given by:
+    $\delta_{i + 1/2} T_k = \widetilde T_k^{\, i + 1} -T_k^{\, i}$ and
+    the average by:
+    $\overline T_k^{\, i + 1/2} = (\widetilde T_k^{\, i + 1/2} - T_k^{\, i}) / 2$.}
+  \label{fig:TRA_Partial_step_scheme}
 \end{figure}
 %>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
@@ -1402 +1434 @@
   \rt.
 \]
-and the resulting forms for the horizontal difference and the horizontal average value of $T$ at a $U$-point are: 
-\begin{equation}
-  \label{eq:zps_hde}
+and the resulting forms for the horizontal difference and the horizontal average value of $T$ at a $U$-point are:
+\begin{equation}
+  \label{eq:TRA_zps_hde}
   \begin{split}
     \delta_{i + 1/2} T       &=
@@ -1428 +1460 @@
 Instead of forming a linear approximation of density, we compute $\widetilde \rho$ from the interpolated values of
 $T$ and $S$, and the pressure at a $u$-point
-(in the equation of state pressure is approximated by depth, see \autoref{subsec:TRA_eos}): 
+(in the equation of state pressure is approximated by depth, see \autoref{subsec:TRA_eos}):
 \[
-  % \label{eq:zps_hde_rho}
+  % \label{eq:TRA_zps_hde_rho}
   \widetilde \rho = \rho (\widetilde T,\widetilde S,z_u) \quad \text{where~} z_u = \min \lt( z_T^{i + 1},z_T^i \rt)
 \]
@@ -1441 +1473 @@
 Note that in almost all the advection schemes presented in this Chapter,
 both averaging and differencing operators appear.
-Yet \autoref{eq:zps_hde} has not been used in these schemes:
+Yet \autoref{eq:TRA_zps_hde} has not been used in these schemes:
 in contrast to diffusion and pressure gradient computations,
 no correction for partial steps is applied for advection.

@@ -1 @@
-*.aux
-*.bbl
-*.blg
-*.dvi
-*.fdb*
-*.fls
-*.idx
-*.ilg
-*.ind
-*.log
-*.maf
-*.mtc*
-*.out
-*.pdf
-*.toc
-_minted-*
+figures