-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12
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
Glad's is_in_active_grid is slightly inconsistent with logic elsewhere in CISM #41
Comments
After changing this, a good sanity check that it is correct is: when running the CISM standard testing (aux_glc tests in the CISM-wrapper test suite), answers should change, but only (initially) in a small number of grid cells: those with topg exactly equal to 0. One way to confirm that we aren't getting inadvertent changes elsewhere could be: create a temporary input file where grid cells with topg == 0 are replaced with topg = 1. (e.g., |
…r checks" This reverts commit 3b899f4. This didn't work: it resulted in the ice mask being 1 everywhere. See ESCOMP#39 (comment) We'll fix this later (see ESCOMP#41)
Revert PR #40 This didn't work: it resulted in the ice mask being 1 everywhere. See #39 (comment) We'll fix this later (see #41)
@billsacks – I like your suggestion with the temporary input file. |
This is a spin-off from #39 . I noticed that the conditional that determines the icemask in
is_in_active_grid
checksusrf > 0
. But apparently some code elsewhere in CISM treats points with topg exactly equal to 0 as land. So, for consistency, is_in_active_grid should also consider these points with topg exactly equal to 0 to be land, and thus within the ice mask.As discussed in #39 , this inconsistency is a problem for conservation, so it should definitely be fixed. However, it only impacts a small number of grid cells. As also discussed in #39 , changing this conditional to
usrf >= 0
doesn't work, because ocean grid cells haveusrf == 0
, so that change led all points in the CISM domain to be considered to be within the ice mask. @whlipscomb suggested a possible change likeusrf > 0 .or. topg >= 0
, but we want to check to make sure that really is the correct conditional, consistent with what is used elsewhere. Ideally, we would use an existing mask variable that is consistent with what is used elsewhere.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: