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
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
CAMS2_83 requires evaluation of MOS
As @michaelgau said in the chat: MOS are given at a certain number of stations. We are supposed to evaluate MOS and ENS against the same set of stations. That set includes all stations for which we have data in the MOS point cloud AND in the csv files from Meteo France. And as I told Charlie, for now I think we 'only' need to make FAIRMODE target plots. I.e. no weird plots or heat maps. So this can be a separate job. As somebody suggested a few weeks ago, it could even be made independently of pyaerocom, but let's discuss at our next meeting (in January) what is less work.
Describe the solution you would like to see
@michaelgau, can you please provide "A clear and concise description of what you want to happen." in addition to what is provided above. If the plan is to do this outside of pyaerocom, I will move the issue to the Model-Evaluation-Tools-Issues repository.
Would you be able to work on this solution yourself?
No.
How can the Pyaerocom development team assist you?
Discussing with CAMS2_83 team specific requirements about placing those requirements here.
Additional context
N/A
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
CAMS2_83 requires evaluation of MOS
As @michaelgau said in the chat:
MOS are given at a certain number of stations. We are supposed to evaluate MOS and ENS against the same set of stations. That set includes all stations for which we have data in the MOS point cloud AND in the csv files from Meteo France. And as I told Charlie, for now I think we 'only' need to make FAIRMODE target plots. I.e. no weird plots or heat maps. So this can be a separate job. As somebody suggested a few weeks ago, it could even be made independently of pyaerocom, but let's discuss at our next meeting (in January) what is less work.
Describe the solution you would like to see
@michaelgau, can you please provide "A clear and concise description of what you want to happen." in addition to what is provided above. If the plan is to do this outside of pyaerocom, I will move the issue to the Model-Evaluation-Tools-Issues repository.
No.
Discussing with CAMS2_83 team specific requirements about placing those requirements here.
Additional context
N/A
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: