Skip to content
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

Get init_interp working correctly with hillslope initial conditions files #1806

Open
billsacks opened this issue Jul 13, 2022 · 3 comments · Fixed by #2703 or #2792
Open

Get init_interp working correctly with hillslope initial conditions files #1806

billsacks opened this issue Jul 13, 2022 · 3 comments · Fixed by #2703 or #2792
Labels
enhancement new capability or improved behavior of existing capability priority: low Background task that doesn't need to be done right away.

Comments

@billsacks
Copy link
Member

I'm pretty sure that init_interp won't currently work correctly with initial conditions files from a hillslope run. (I'm also not positive it's working ideally for interpolation from a non-hillslope run to a hillslope run, but it seems likely that it's at least doing something reasonable in that situation.) One need – maybe the main one – is to label each column with appropriate metadata so that, in the interpolation, we can copy data from the source lowland column to the destination lowland column, etc. This can be done with discrete labels giving the type of each column and/or a continuous (real-valued) variable that lets us find the closest match. Currently, all vegetated columns are given the same type index and init_interp doesn't have a way to handle multiple columns in the vegetated landunit. (In contrast, for some other landunits, like crop and glacier, we have mechanisms to ensure that the appropriate source column from a landunit is associated with a given destination column.)

A good first-order check of whether this is working correctly is whether interpolating an initial conditions file onto an identical configuration will result in a replica of the original initial conditions file (this is what the LII test checks). Currently I believe this would not be the case. But eventually - at least if hillslope becomes default - we also want this to be doing something reasonable when interpolating from one resolution / hillslope configuration to another.

@swensosc

@billsacks billsacks added the enhancement new capability or improved behavior of existing capability label Jul 13, 2022
@billsacks
Copy link
Member Author

I am labeling this as an enhancement because hillslope hydrology is not standard yet so this issue isn't really causing problems... but if/when hillslope becomes standard, this would be elevated to a bug.

@samsrabin
Copy link
Collaborator

Re-labeling this to bug + low priority.

@samsrabin samsrabin added priority: low Background task that doesn't need to be done right away. bug something is working incorrectly and removed enhancement new capability or improved behavior of existing capability labels Aug 14, 2024
@samsrabin
Copy link
Collaborator

Sorry @slevis-lmwg, but this actually shouldn't have been marked as closed by #2703. That doesn't actually resolve the issue here; rather, it makes it so the user has to know they're doing something unsupported.

@samsrabin samsrabin reopened this Sep 27, 2024
@samsrabin samsrabin added enhancement new capability or improved behavior of existing capability and removed bug something is working incorrectly labels Sep 27, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement new capability or improved behavior of existing capability priority: low Background task that doesn't need to be done right away.
Projects
None yet
2 participants