-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 46
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Naming convention for grid aliases #70
Comments
In ccs_config_cesm0.0.38 we have 183 aliases. C192_C192_mg17 The following 3 atm/lnd grids have atmosphere running on the ocean grid: 1D_1D List of 11 CLM single point/regional grids that are probably OK: 1x1_brazil The WAVE watch grid that's OK: ww3a The following 5 are for running with POP and good: T62_g16 The following 2 are odd grids I'm not sure what to think about: T62_s11 Some grids for Paleo work that aren't being used anymore and maybe can be removed? (they should be removed or standardized) T31_g37 (this is the only being used) A set of 24 MOM grids: f09_t061 A set of 4 tri-grid grids to standardize: (these are no longer being used) ne30_f19_g16 By above convention they should be: ne30_ne30_lf19_mg16 A set of 10 atm-lnd cases that should be standardized or removed: (they are not used) ne15_g17 A set of 9 mpas grids that should be standardized: mpasa480_mpasa480 A set of 9 glacier grids to remove or standardize: f19_g17_gl4 (this one is not used) The following 19 have a standardized alias and should be deprecated and removed from usage in components: T42_T42 --> T42_T42_mg17 the following 9 ROF grids should be standardized: f19_g16_r01 (not used) The following 9 mizuRoute grids should be standardized: nldas2_rUSGS_mnldas2 |
Following. E3SM would like to follow a common convention. |
"Standard form for ocn is {ocn-grid}_{ice-grid}" Do you have cases where the sea ice and ocn grids are different? |
@rljacob no we don't have ocean and ice on a different grid, and actually the long form format doesn't allow ocn and ice to be different. But, we do have these grids that reflect that convention: 1D_1D I actually think we should probably think about changing that convention because of the exact thing you point out. So perhaps the above examples could be removed? |
My understanding is that g16_g16 and g17_g17 and 1d_1d refer to having the atm and ocn on the same grid (g16, g17 and 1d) - not the ocn and ice on different grids. The ocean and ice cannot be allowed to be on different grids. That is a fundamental assumption for CESM and I believe E3SM as well. |
Thanks for pointing that out @mvertens I've updated the top two to reflect that now. |
Dont' forget about tri-grid cases. Those are usually |
My understanding (maybe wrong) is that the standard form for atm (i.e., F compsets) is still {atm-grid}_{ocn/ice-grid}_m{mask} – it's just that atm & ocn are on the same grid for F compsets. Others please correct me if I'm wrong here. |
Thanks @ekluzek for laying this out, and especially for your careful analysis of the existing grids. Your idea of moving to more standardization in grid aliases seems good. |
Using the following command I checked what grids are actually being tested in cesm2_3_alpha10c
1x1_brazil |
In order to get these new standards in place, I think the steps are:
|
I met with Will and @briandobbins regarding this issue. I will do some background efforts on this again starting in January. The first two steps above are things that could be done, remove grids that aren't tested, add new aliases for grids that should be removed. @briandobbins would like to work on this in order to make it easier for users, and having 183 grid aliases in the list is daunting for a new user! He suggests we could have a few simpler aliases for novice users that would do the most standard type of things 1-Degree for example. Doing that might need to have some control logic between the grid and the compset though. One concern with this is that we need to know what SIMA plans on doing with grids. So we want to wait on this a bit for a final accepted grid alias naming convention. We also pointed out that tri-grids are NOT being tested right now, but there is important functionality for them, so we should add back testing for them. We'd also like to add some metadata so we can mark grids in various ways, like being deprecated. Maybe we could mark a few as the most standard ones. We mark what compset/grid combinations are considered "scientifically supported", and you have to run with --run-unsupported to run others, maybe we need something like that for grids? |
Is there any use of tri-grids in CESM? While the naming convention has to include tri-grids, I don't see any reason CESM folks need to spend time testing and/or supporting them. |
Given that CAM supports 5 dycores (and I have not seen any plans to remove any), trying to introduce a simple description, such as 1-Degree, would introduce a new problem of creating a new way to specify the dycore in the |
We talked about this at the Nov/15/2022 CSEG meeting. We agreed on a few things to put into practice for a naming convention of grid aliases.
Examples:
Some of the the things we said in the 11/15 meeting were:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: