Minor adjustments to convective-stratiform algorith, documentation, and example #1434
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This fix prevents the final convective stratiform array from being masked by the background field. Due to the nature of the `calc_thres` (minimum number of points needed to calculate the background average), the background field does not compute on the edges of the echo. Instead, we want the convective stratiform field to cover the same region as the original reflectivity field.
zssherman
approved these changes
Jun 14, 2023
mgrover1
approved these changes
Jun 15, 2023
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Hi folks,
I found a minor error with my initial code which masked the final convective-stratiform array by the background field instead of the field itself. There were also a minor format issue in one of the functions and some minor issues related to the plotting in the example (which I hope I have fixed).
Hopefully this is a straightforward edit.
Best,
Laura