Diagnostic Output with Modified Combinations

[pernak18]

we should be providing diagnostics output like we used to do:

Iteration 94
band16_coefficients_LW_g03-04_iter094.nc, Trial: 145, Cost: 100.558639, Delta-Cost: 0.1196
	flux_net, band_flux_net, heating_rate, heating_rate_7, flux_net_forcing_5, flux_net_forcing_6, flux_net_forcing_7, flux_net_forcing_9, flux_net_forcing_10, flux_net_forcing_11, flux_net_forcing_12, flux_net_forcing_13, flux_net_forcing_14, flux_net_forcing_15, flux_net_forcing_16, flux_net_forcing_17, flux_net_forcing_18 = 99.5851, 99.3616, 102.0414, 103.3084, 96.2623, 100.5032, 107.0325, 100.0000, 83.2970, 101.2200, 101.4471, 100.4604, 99.9562, 99.2261, 98.1497, 101.5854, 102.0847

... apply g-point combine modifications...results for 2 different weight scales ("plus" and "2plus"):
band16_coefficients_LW_g03-04_iter094.nc, Trial: 145, Cost: 100.517579, Delta-Cost: 0.5176
	flux_net, band_flux_net, heating_rate, heating_rate_7, flux_net_forcing_5, flux_net_forcing_6, flux_net_forcing_7, flux_net_forcing_9, flux_net_forcing_10, flux_net_forcing_11, flux_net_forcing_12, flux_net_forcing_13, flux_net_forcing_14, flux_net_forcing_15, flux_net_forcing_16, flux_net_forcing_17, flux_net_forcing_18 = 99.5145, 99.3939, 102.0424, 103.3090, 96.2623, 100.4943, 107.0325, 100.0000, 83.2970, 101.2200, 101.4471, 100.4604, 99.9562, 99.2261, 98.1497, 101.5854, 102.0847
band16_coefficients_LW_g03-04_iter094.nc, Trial: 145, Cost: 100.474838, Delta-Cost: 0.4748
	flux_net, band_flux_net, heating_rate, heating_rate_7, flux_net_forcing_5, flux_net_forcing_6, flux_net_forcing_7, flux_net_forcing_9, flux_net_forcing_10, flux_net_forcing_11, flux_net_forcing_12, flux_net_forcing_13, flux_net_forcing_14, flux_net_forcing_15, flux_net_forcing_16, flux_net_forcing_17, flux_net_forcing_18 = 99.4411, 99.4270, 102.0434, 103.3096, 96.2623, 100.4856, 107.0325, 100.0000, 83.2970, 101.2200, 101.4471, 100.4604, 99.9562, 99.2261, 98.1497, 101.5854, 102.0847

... eventual winner with real flux and cost calcs and the zero-crossing weight scale:
band13_coefficients_LW_g03-04_iter094_regr094.nc, Trial: 131, Cost: 100.438930, Delta-Cost: -0.0001
	flux_net, band_flux_net, heating_rate, heating_rate_7, flux_net_forcing_5, flux_net_forcing_6, flux_net_forcing_7, flux_net_forcing_9, flux_net_forcing_10, flux_net_forcing_11, flux_net_forcing_12, flux_net_forcing_13, flux_net_forcing_14, flux_net_forcing_15, flux_net_forcing_16, flux_net_forcing_17, flux_net_forcing_18 = 99.3352, 99.3638, 102.0301, 103.3029, 98.0105, 100.4869, 107.4082, 100.0000, 83.2970, 101.2200, 101.4471, 100.4604, 99.9562, 99.2261, 98.1497, 101.5854, 102.0847

but i have suppressed in abs_val because there's so much of it (all modified trials, which initially is 147 trials). i have to find a way to convey this information to end users

[pernak18]

i don't think we need to do this anymore. at the very least, it's a pretty low priority