You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Changing which 0-weight points are active should not change answers for gridcell averages. If this does change answers, it indicates a bug: values in 0-weight patches or columns should not affect the gridcell averages.
I have found two bugs by doing a manual test like this: bug 1851 and bug 2321. (See notes in bug 1851 for more detailed thoughts.)
We should add an automated test of this. Specifically, it could do two runs: one out-of-the-box and one with all_active = .true. (probably with finidat = ' ', because it can be problematic to set all_active = .true. with an finidat file not set up for that situation - although maybe we could use an initial conditions file along with init_interp?) The gridcell-level history fields should be bit-for-bit identical in these two runs. We could do that with a mechanism similar to the current LII test. However, this will hopefully become more straightforward once CESM-Development/cime#146 is resolved - hopefully making it relatively trivial to create one-off tests like this.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Bill Sacks < sacks@ucar.edu > - 2017-11-03 15:42:39 -0600
cime issue 146 and relevant follow-on issues have now been addressed, so it should be relatively easy to add a new test type like this.
In addition to doing a basic test, as suggested in the original comment, it could also be useful to include a transient test that has some columns (probably crop columns) going back and forth between non-zero-weight and zero-weight a few times (when they're non-zero-weight, they should stay that way for a few years to allow crops to actually grow). I think we'd expect final gridcell-average results to be the same regardless of whether the crop column stayed active or went inactive when it had 0 weight. This could be done with a single-point test. The point of this would be to catch problems with columns/patches going from active to inactive to active, as in #209 . However, catching these problems may rely on having the transition from active to inactive happen in the middle of the growing season.
Bill Sacks < sacks@ucar.edu > - 2016-06-13 20:37:51 -0600
Bugzilla Id: 2322
Bugzilla CC: erik@ucar.edu, rfisher@ucar.edu,
Changing which 0-weight points are active should not change answers for gridcell averages. If this does change answers, it indicates a bug: values in 0-weight patches or columns should not affect the gridcell averages.
I have found two bugs by doing a manual test like this: bug 1851 and bug 2321. (See notes in bug 1851 for more detailed thoughts.)
We should add an automated test of this. Specifically, it could do two runs: one out-of-the-box and one with all_active = .true. (probably with finidat = ' ', because it can be problematic to set all_active = .true. with an finidat file not set up for that situation - although maybe we could use an initial conditions file along with init_interp?) The gridcell-level history fields should be bit-for-bit identical in these two runs. We could do that with a mechanism similar to the current LII test. However, this will hopefully become more straightforward once CESM-Development/cime#146 is resolved - hopefully making it relatively trivial to create one-off tests like this.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: