Changes (minor) to MODIS and LIDAR simulators.

[dustinswales]

Recently some small issues were uncovered by modeling centers implementing COSP1.4.2. and I propose we include these changes on the COSP2 master branch.

*) In the LIDAR simulator there was a division-by-zero for scenes for really thick clouds. Including a guard against this results in some very minor changes to the COSP2 reference dataset:
atb532_perp: 3.33 % of values differ, relative range: -1.10e+00 to -3.84e-05
These changes are associated with very small values and do not impact any of the MODIS diagnostics. (NOTE: this small change would not have been noticed using the previous offline driver, as atb532_perp is internal and is not part of output from the CMOR offline driver)

*) In the MODIS simulator, some of the gridmean diagnostics were being set to zero for clear scenes, when they should have been set to undefined. This impacted the averaging being performed by the model, resulting in much large values than expected. In the offline tests, we see the following:
tautmodis: 18.30 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00
tauwmodis: 30.72 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00
tauimodis: 65.36 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00
tautlogmodis: 18.30 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00
tauwlogmodis: 30.72 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00
tauilogmodis: 65.36 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00
reffclwmodis: 30.72 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00
reffclimodis: 65.36 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00
lwpmodis: 30.72 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00
iwpmodis: 65.36 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00

For both cases, diagnostics requested for CFMIP3/CMIP6 are not impacted.

[klein21]

Dustin, For these changes it is most important that the LIDAR/MODIS developers approve them. If those developers, Helene Chepfer and Robert Pincus respectively, approve of the modifications, then I approve merging this to the trunk. One small comment, in your first point below I believe you mean to say “do not impact any of the LIDAR diagnostics”, not “MODIS” diagnostics, right? Steve From: dustinswales <notifications@github.com> Reply-To: "CFMIP/COSPv2.0" <reply@reply.github.com> Date: Thursday, March 22, 2018 at 2:17 PM To: "CFMIP/COSPv2.0" <COSPv2.0@noreply.github.com> Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com> Subject: [CFMIP/COSPv2.0] Changes (minor) to MODIS and LIDAR simulators. (#9) Recently some small issues were uncovered by modeling centers implementing COSP1.4.2. and I propose we include these changes on the COSP2 master branch. *) In the LIDAR simulator there was a division-by-zero for scenes for really thick clouds. Including a guard against this results in some very minor changes to the COSP2 reference dataset: atb532_perp: 3.33 % of values differ, relative range: -1.10e+00 to -3.84e-05 These changes are associated with very small values and do not impact any of the MODIS diagnostics. (NOTE: this small change would not have been noticed using the previous offline driver, as atb532_perp is internal and is not part of output from the CMOR offline driver) *) In the MODIS simulator, some of the gridmean diagnostics were being set to zero for clear scenes, when they should have been set to undefined. This impacted the averaging being performed by the model, resulting in much large values than expected. In the offline tests, we see the following: tautmodis: 18.30 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00 tauwmodis: 30.72 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00 tauimodis: 65.36 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00 tautlogmodis: 18.30 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00 tauwlogmodis: 30.72 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00 tauilogmodis: 65.36 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00 reffclwmodis: 30.72 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00 reffclimodis: 65.36 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00 lwpmodis: 30.72 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00 iwpmodis: 65.36 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00 For both cases, diagnostics requested for CFMIP3/CMIP6 are not impacted.

…

________________________________ You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: #9 Commit Summary * Added changes to lidar simulator to guard against divide by zero. In MODIS simulator, set mean in-cloud fields to R_UNDEF instead of 0. File Changes * M driver/data/outputs/UKMO/cosp2_output_um.ref.nc<https://github.com/CFMIP/COSPv2.0/pull/9/files#diff-0> (0) * M src/simulator/MODIS_simulator/modis_simulator.F90<https://github.com/CFMIP/COSPv2.0/pull/9/files#diff-1> (20) * M src/simulator/actsim/lidar_simulator.F90<https://github.com/CFMIP/COSPv2.0/pull/9/files#diff-2> (21) Patch Links: * https://github.com/CFMIP/COSPv2.0/pull/9.patch * https://github.com/CFMIP/COSPv2.0/pull/9.diff — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#9>, or mute the thread<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AfO_cHkJG2uzk5hjSFTv5zLgua5JrV3Oks5thBS5gaJpZM4S3zuZ>.

[dustinswales]

Steve,

On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 1:15 PM, klein21 ***@***.***> wrote: Dustin, For these changes it is most important that the LIDAR/MODIS developers approve them. If those developers, Helene Chepfer and Robert Pincus respectively, approve of the modifications, then I approve merging this to the trunk. One small comment, in your first point below I believe you mean to say “do not impact any of the LIDAR diagnostics”, not “MODIS” diagnostics, right?

Yes you are correct. My apologizes. Dustin

…

Steve From: dustinswales ***@***.***> Reply-To: "CFMIP/COSPv2.0" ***@***.***> Date: Thursday, March 22, 2018 at 2:17 PM To: "CFMIP/COSPv2.0" ***@***.***> Cc: Subscribed ***@***.***> Subject: [CFMIP/COSPv2.0] Changes (minor) to MODIS and LIDAR simulators. (#9) Recently some small issues were uncovered by modeling centers implementing COSP1.4.2. and I propose we include these changes on the COSP2 master branch. *) In the LIDAR simulator there was a division-by-zero for scenes for really thick clouds. Including a guard against this results in some very minor changes to the COSP2 reference dataset: atb532_perp: 3.33 % of values differ, relative range: -1.10e+00 to -3.84e-05 These changes are associated with very small values and do not impact any of the MODIS diagnostics. (NOTE: this small change would not have been noticed using the previous offline driver, as atb532_perp is internal and is not part of output from the CMOR offline driver) *) In the MODIS simulator, some of the gridmean diagnostics were being set to zero for clear scenes, when they should have been set to undefined. This impacted the averaging being performed by the model, resulting in much large values than expected. In the offline tests, we see the following: tautmodis: 18.30 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00 tauwmodis: 30.72 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00 tauimodis: 65.36 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00 tautlogmodis: 18.30 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00 tauwlogmodis: 30.72 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00 tauilogmodis: 65.36 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00 reffclwmodis: 30.72 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00 reffclimodis: 65.36 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00 lwpmodis: 30.72 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00 iwpmodis: 65.36 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00 For both cases, diagnostics requested for CFMIP3/CMIP6 are not impacted. ________________________________ You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: #9 Commit Summary * Added changes to lidar simulator to guard against divide by zero. In MODIS simulator, set mean in-cloud fields to R_UNDEF instead of 0. File Changes * M driver/data/outputs/UKMO/cosp2_output_um.ref.nc<https:// github.com/CFMIP/COSPv2.0/pull/9/files#diff-0> (0) * M src/simulator/MODIS_simulator/modis_simulator.F90<https:// github.com/CFMIP/COSPv2.0/pull/9/files#diff-1> (20) * M src/simulator/actsim/lidar_simulator.F90<https://github. com/CFMIP/COSPv2.0/pull/9/files#diff-2> (21) Patch Links: * https://github.com/CFMIP/COSPv2.0/pull/9.patch * https://github.com/CFMIP/COSPv2.0/pull/9.diff — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<https://github.com/ CFMIP/COSPv2.0#9>, or mute the thread<https://github.com/ notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AfO_cHkJG2uzk5hjSFTv5zLgua5JrV3Oks 5thBS5gaJpZM4S3zuZ>. — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#9 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ANTYadMapT7DSCUypOqdrLN0fsTvcNoUks5thUnFgaJpZM4S3zuZ> .

-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dustin Swales Associate Scientist CIRES /NOAA-ESRL (303)-497-7008 dustin.swales@noaa.gov ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[RobertPincus]

I’m Robert Pincus, the developer of the MODIS simulator, and I approve this change. (For our non-US colleagues, that’s a lame joke: political ads in the US often say something like this.) Note that the instantaneous differences Dustin notes in the MODIS simulator below do not propagate to the monthly-averaged statistics. The error arise only when there are no clouds and mean values are weighted in time by the cloud fraction. - Robert On Mar 23, 2018, at 3:15 PM, klein21 <notifications@github.com<mailto:notifications@github.com>> wrote: Dustin, For these changes it is most important that the LIDAR/MODIS developers approve them. If those developers, Helene Chepfer and Robert Pincus respectively, approve of the modifications, then I approve merging this to the trunk. One small comment, in your first point below I believe you mean to say “do not impact any of the LIDAR diagnostics”, not “MODIS” diagnostics, right? Steve Recently some small issues were uncovered by modeling centers implementing COSP1.4.2. and I propose we include these changes on the COSP2 master branch. *) In the LIDAR simulator there was a division-by-zero for scenes for really thick clouds. Including a guard against this results in some very minor changes to the COSP2 reference dataset: atb532_perp: 3.33 % of values differ, relative range: -1.10e+00 to -3.84e-05 These changes are associated with very small values and do not impact any of the MODIS diagnostics. (NOTE: this small change would not have been noticed using the previous offline driver, as atb532_perp is internal and is not part of output from the CMOR offline driver) *) In the MODIS simulator, some of the gridmean diagnostics were being set to zero for clear scenes, when they should have been set to undefined. This impacted the averaging being performed by the model, resulting in much large values than expected. In the offline tests, we see the following: tautmodis: 18.30 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00 tauwmodis: 30.72 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00 tauimodis: 65.36 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00 tautlogmodis: 18.30 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00 tauwlogmodis: 30.72 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00 tauilogmodis: 65.36 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00 reffclwmodis: 30.72 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00 reffclimodis: 65.36 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00 lwpmodis: 30.72 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00 iwpmodis: 65.36 % of values differ, relative range: -1.00e+00 to -1.00e+00 For both cases, diagnostics requested for CFMIP3/CMIP6 are not impacted.

…

________________________________ You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: #9 Commit Summary * Added changes to lidar simulator to guard against divide by zero. In MODIS simulator, set mean in-cloud fields to R_UNDEF instead of 0. File Changes * M driver/data/outputs/UKMO/cosp2_output_um.ref.nc<https://github.com/CFMIP/COSPv2.0/pull/9/files#diff-0> (0) * M src/simulator/MODIS_simulator/modis_simulator.F90<https://github.com/CFMIP/COSPv2.0/pull/9/files#diff-1> (20) * M src/simulator/actsim/lidar_simulator.F90<https://github.com/CFMIP/COSPv2.0/pull/9/files#diff-2> (21) Patch Links: * https://github.com/CFMIP/COSPv2.0/pull/9.patch * https://github.com/CFMIP/COSPv2.0/pull/9.diff — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#9>, or mute the thread<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AfO_cHkJG2uzk5hjSFTv5zLgua5JrV3Oks5thBS5gaJpZM4S3zuZ>. — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#9 (comment)>, or mute the thread<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALRriOABxACKFmfSuvQZd1yHrNgEHvQsks5thUnEgaJpZM4S3zuZ>.