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
Vankeken 2008 subduction benchmark #5259
Vankeken 2008 subduction benchmark #5259
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
A few comments already. I'm going to look through the .cc files on occasion.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@danieldouglas92 - Thanks for contributing! A few general questions, comments, and requests in addition to specific comments on some files:
- It looks like many of the functions in the plugin, such as those related to pressure, are not used. I would recommend removing them and downsizing the plugin to just what is needed. It may be that you could just use the cookbook plugin that already exists in the code for prescribing velocities?
- Can you adjust the paraview images such that (i) the background is white, (ii) the colorbar and colorbar text are larger, and (iii) add in a scale bar for each axis?
- At some point during the review process, please add a test that run a short, low resolution version of this model.
Thanks!
cookbooks/vankeken_subduction/plugin/prescribed_velocity_pressure.cc
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
cookbooks/vankeken_subduction/plugin/prescribed_velocity_pressure.cc
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
@maxrudolph - This PR is a follow-up to your van Keken 2008 benchmark PR (#1864) by @danieldouglas92, @cedrict and @bangerth. Creating a new mesh that aligns with the edges of the slab seems to have resolved many of the issues seen in the original PR. At some point, would you be willing to take a look and do a review? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@danieldouglas92 - Thanks for the updates and indeed the PR is almost there.
A few minor comments here and there, in addition to the following request - for the test case, can you link to the cookbook prm in the following manner, and then just modify the relevant parameters?
include $ASPECT_SOURCE_DIR/cookbooks/vankeken_subduction/vankeken_corner_flow.prm
This will ensure the cookbook PRM itself is able to run with the current main branch.
Thanks!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Would you mind adding a changelog entry to doc/modules/...
?
/rebuild |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@danieldouglas92 - Good to go from my side once the testers have finished and @bangerth gives a thumbs up as well. Thanks for the contribution!
Tests are failing |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thumbs up, but as noted above, the testers are failing.
Specifically, the failure is in the new tests:
|
Hi @danieldouglas92 it's great to see that you got a more reasonable solution to the van Keken 2008 corner flow benchmark. I was looking at the pull request and I can't find the actual benchmark values. Do you compute the point values and average values for wedge temperature that are used for the inter-code comparison in the paper? |
Hey @maxrudolph, for the purposes of this PR I just wanted to get this into ASPECT as a cookbook, but I have not tried to compare the output to the 2008 benchmark yet. That is something that I would be interesting in doing at some point, but because it isn't done yet Im putting this in the cookbooks instead of benchmarks directory. |
Still same error:
What happens if you run this test (using |
bdb1b22
to
f0ffb6f
Compare
@@ -0,0 +1,14 @@ | |||
|
|||
include $ASPECT_SOURCE_DIR/cookbooks/vankeken_subduction/vankeken_corner_flow.prm |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The problem with the failing test is here. In this test, you are including the .prm
file from the cookbooks directory, which contains the following lines:
# Load the prescribed velocity and pressure library
set Additional shared libraries = ./plugin/libvankeken_subduction.so
But in the directory where the test is executed, there is no such shared library and the test consequently aborts. I'm surprised that the test works for you locally, if you run it with the commands
make setup_tests
ctest -R vankeken
in your build directory.
This kind of test design doesn't work because it assumes that the shared library you want is located in a directory specified in the cookbook, not in the test. Are there other tests that reference .prm
files from the cookbooks where we could look up how this is handled there?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Put a .cc with the same name in the test directory and use an include statement of the source file in the cookbooks directory.
f0ffb6f
to
c288865
Compare
b9a7bc3
to
beb7eee
Compare
@danieldouglas92 In my very old PR on this benchmark, I have some python code to do the benchmark comparison. It is here... https://github.com/maxrudolph/aspect/tree/vankeken_subduction |
We are finalizing this years hackathon so we would prefer to merge this in the current state today, but follow up PRs with more accurate comparisons are very welcome @danieldouglas92 and @maxrudolph. |
Pull Request Checklist. Please read and check each box with an X. Delete any part not applicable. Ask on the forum if you need help with any step.
Describe what you did in this PR and why you did it.
Before your first pull request:
For all pull requests:
For new features/models or changes of existing features: