Prioritized list of test cases to port to the new compass package #51
Comments
xylar
added
question
|
@vanroekel, @matthewhoffman, @sbrus89, @mark-petersen, @milenaveneziani, @darincomeau, could you all help me prioritize these test cases. If you want to prioritize them, move them up the list either by dragging them or editing the comment. If you know a test case isn't needed (it will still be available in legacy COMPASS, it just won't be ported), please use Please |
|
@trhille, you may also be a good person to give feedback on the |
|
Thanks for making this list @xylar. I've made a few minor shifts. I've also bumped cvmix to the bottom as I'd like to take these on myself for porting to the new compass package. @mark-petersen if you don't think the redi verification tests are particularly helpful to have for standard testing, please de prioritize those. |
|
@vanroekel, I've moved the cvmix test cases up in priority but put your username after them, I hope that's okay. This way we can kind of keep track of who's planning to do what. |
|
great idea. Thanks for making that change. |
|
@xylar, I'd like to take on the hurricane/tides cases (I'll mark them in the comment). That way I can learn the ins and outs of the new COMAPSS. It'll also be a good opportunity for me to possibly prune these as necessary when I go through them. Thanks again for doing all this! |
|
@xylar, sounds good. Thanks for the heads up. I'm excited to start using the new compass! |
|
@xylar , I've updated the landice lists. There may be additional round of decisions on what to port when (or at all), but this narrows things down a bit. |
|
Thanks @matthewhoffman, that's really helpful. I'll work my way through the ones with my name on them in the next week or 2. |
|
@cbegeman and @dengwirda, if it makes sense to port some of the |
|
@xylar Thanks. It doesn't appear that |
|
Okay, rather than trying to port anything from |
|
@xylar, the drying slope and dam break cases are both taken from this paper: Warner et al. 2013 which describes the wetting and drying implementation in ROMS. I believe both test cases use the ROMS data in the analysis steps for comparison. The MPAS results for these cases were published here: Cao et al. 2021 |
|
Which is to say that I think carrying these cases over (rather than starting fresh) is important. Of course, adding additional cases would be great too. |
|
Also, I happened to be re-running the drying slope case the other day and noticed that it no longer behaves the way it originally did. My results from the other day look like this: versus the result from the Cao et al. 2021 paper: Note that the 0.05 days result is way off in the top plot. |
|
@xylar @cbegeman I think another (new) test that could be useful as a wetting + drying verification is the oscillations-in-a-bowl case, similar to that described in this NEMO paper: Implementation and assessment of a flux limiter based wetting and drying scheme in NEMO. With repeated wetting + drying cycles, this should give us a way to test the symmetry of the scheme, and any spurious frictional losses over time. |
|
@sbrus89 Great! I'm happy to hear that both of these test cases derived from existing tests. Then they do seem worth bringing over. @xylar Let me know how you'd like to share the work and @dengwirda whether you'd like to get your hands dirty with e.g. the bowl case. |
|
@sbrus89 and @cbegeman, could we check off which of these are priorities? First round:
Second round:
Third round:
Later (if at all):
Do you have permission to check/uncheck these? If not, comment and I'll do it. |
|
To get the ball rolling, I have checked the ones I would be inclined to port. It's typically easy to handle multiple resolutions in one port. It shouldn't be too hard to handle multiple vertical coordinates in one port. @cbegeman made clear that the dam-break test case would be a later priority because it's more rigorous and challenging. |
|
@xylar I can't edit but I think what you've designated is fine. Since we're starting with only 1 vertical level, it's pretty low priority to handle multiple vertical coordinates. |
|
@cbegeman, good point. I'll prioritize |
xylar
removed
the
python package
|
@sbrus89, there are many Hurricane test cases slated for porting (see above) but I didn't see an exact match to the ones you created. Could you check off whichever ones you ported (or the closest matches). If you don't plan to port some of those tests after all should we move some to "won't port"? |
|
@xylar, I just did what you suggested. |
|
Excellent, much appreciated @sbrus89! |
Here is a list of test cases from legacy COMPASS that could be ported to the new
compasspython package. I would like help putting them in order of priority.A checked box below means the test case has already been ported. Strike-through means we don't plan to port them.
legacy COMPASS
landicetest cases to port:Land-ice tests not yet slated for porting:
landice/MISMIP3D/full_width/Stndlandice/MISMIP3D/minimal_width/Stndlandice/hydro-shmip/standard_resolution/experiment_Alandice/hydro-shmip/standard_resolution/experiment_Blandice/hydro-shmip/standard_resolution/experiment_Clandice/hydro-shmip/standard_resolution/experiment_Dlandice/hydro-shmip/standard_resolution/experiment_Elegacy COMPASS
oceantest cases to port:Ocean tests not yet slated for porting:
Ocean tests that will not be ported:
ocean/coastal/Maine/initocean/global_ocean/CA120to3/build_meshocean/global_ocean/EC15to60/build_meshocean/global_ocean/EC15to60/files_for_e3smocean/global_ocean/EC15to60/spin_up_EN4_1900ocean/global_ocean/EC15to60/spin_up_PHCocean/global_ocean/HI120to12/build_meshocean/global_ocean/QU240/testocean/global_ocean/WC12/initocean/global_ocean/WC12/spin_upocean/periodic_planar/20km/default_lightocean/periodic_planar/20km/region_reset_light_testocean/periodic_planar/20km/time_reset_light_testocean/soma/32km/time_varying_windocean/sub_ice_shelf_2D/5km/Haney_number_initocean/sub_ice_shelf_2D/5km/Haney_number_iterative_initocean/sub_ice_shelf_2D/5km/defaultocean/sub_ice_shelf_2D/5km/with_fraziltest/basic_spherical/960km/defaultocean/hurricane/USDEQU120at30cr10rr2/synthetic_sandyocean/hurricane/USDEQU120at30cr10rr2WD_veg/build_meshocean/hurricane/USDEQU120at30cr10rr2WD_veg/sandyocean/hurricane/USDEQU240at60cr20rr4/build_meshocean/hurricane/USDEQU240at60cr20rr4/sandyocean/hurricane/USDEQU240at60cr20rr4/synthetic_sandyocean/hurricane/USDEQU240at60cr20rr4WD/build_meshocean/hurricane/USDEQU240at60cr20rr4WD/sandyocean/hurricane/USDEQU240at60cr20rr4WD/synthetic_sandyocean/hurricane/USDEQU240at60cr20rr4WD_veg/build_meshocean/hurricane/USDEQU240at60cr20rr4WD_veg/sandyocean/hurricane/USDEQU60at15cr5rr1/build_meshocean/hurricane/USDEQU60at15cr5rr1/sandyocean/hurricane/USDEQU60at15cr5rr100WD/build_meshocean/hurricane/USDEQU60at15cr5rr100WD/sandyocean/hurricane/USDEQU60at15cr5rr1WD/build_meshocean/hurricane/USDEQU60at15cr5rr1WD/sandyocean/hurricane/USDEQU60at15cr5rr1WD_veg/build_meshocean/hurricane/USDEQU60at15cr5rr1WD_veg/sandyocean/hurricane/USDEQU60at15cr5rr250WD/build_meshocean/hurricane/USDEQU60at15cr5rr250WD/sandyocean/hurricane/USDEQU60at15cr5rr500WD/build_meshocean/hurricane/USDEQU60at15cr5rr500WD/sandyThe text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: