Comments (8)
Yes, I'd recommend RK4 for the supercycling tests. It wouldn't hurt to also do RK2 for the highest-resolution time step too, just as a double check.
from mpas-model.
from mpas-model.
@bradyrx, the runs you plan to do in the Southern Ocean would be perfect for this application.
What is the global time step you are currently using? I'm thinking you could easily try a 10X longer time frame for particles to start. Also, make sure you are using RK4:
config_AM_lagrPartTrack_timeIntegration = 4
The default is RK2 for efficiency when config_AM_lagrPartTrack_compute_interval = 'dt'
See #8.
from mpas-model.
I believe the global time step is default. Output from the current run shows :config_dt = "00:10:00" ;
, assuming that's the proper config option you're referencing it is 10 minutes.
I'll make sure to use RK4 when implementing the particles. Should I set RK4 on these supercycling tests?
from mpas-model.
I think similar to the sampling namelist entries, config_AM_lagrPartTrack_timeIntegration
is not yet incorporated into E3SM as a whole, so the system doesn't recognize it when changed in user_nl_mpaso
:
Calling /turquoise/usr/projects/climate/rileybrady/E3SM_supercycling/components/mpas-ocean/cime_config/buildnml
ERROR: Command: '/turquoise/usr/projects/climate/rileybrady/E3SM_supercycling/components/mpas-ocean/bld/build-namelist -infile /turquoise/usr/projects/climate/rileybrady/E3SM_supercycling/GMPAS-IAF.T62_oEC60to30v3.noSupercycling.RK4/Buildconf/mpasoconf/cesm_namelist -caseroot /turquoise/usr/projects/climate/rileybrady/E3SM_supercycling/GMPAS-IAF.T62_oEC60to30v3.noSupercycling.RK4 -casebuild /turquoise/usr/projects/climate/rileybrady/E3SM_supercycling/GMPAS-IAF.T62_oEC60to30v3.noSupercycling.RK4/Buildconf -cimeroot /turquoise/usr/projects/climate/rileybrady/E3SM_supercycling/cime -inst_string '' -decomp_prefix 'mpas-o.graph.info.' -date_stamp '161222' -ocn_grid 'oEC60to30v3' -ocn_forcing 'core_forced_restoring' -ocn_bgc 'no_bgc' -ocn_co2_type 'constant' -atm_co2_const_val '379.0' -ice_bgc 'no_ice_bgc' -ntasks_ocn '512' -ninst_ocn '1'' failed with error 'b"** ERROR: either config_am_lagrparttrack_timeintegration is not a valid MPASO namelist variable or config_am_lagrparttrack_timeintegration = '4' is not a valid value; please fix user_nl_mpaso. Note that config_am_lagrparttrack_timeintegration may appear in multiple namelists, in which case you need to specify the correct namelist in user_nl_mpaso using the format config_am_lagrparttrack_timeintegration&namelist_nml = '4', where &namelist_nml is the mpaso_in namelist containing config_am_lagrparttrack_timeintegration.**"' from dir '/turquoise/usr/projects/climate/rileybrady/E3SM_supercycling/GMPAS-IAF.T62_oEC60to30v3.noSupercycling.RK4/Buildconf/mpasoconf'
I'll go ahead and just set RK4 to default in the mpas Registry and set up the RK4 cases from there.
from mpas-model.
@bradyrx is doing testing with
- RK2 no supercycling
- RK4 no supercycling
- RK4 1 hr
- RK4 2 hr
- RK4 4 hr supercycling cases
from mpas-model.
Results from supercycling cases. This was a 60to30km g-case (GMPAS-IAF) physics-only simulation. Seeding was restricted to Southern Ocean and passive/surface float types (for some perspective on our use-case).
Case Description | Run Efficiency [SYPD] |
---|---|
No Supercycling, RK2 | 1.75 |
No Supercycling, RK4 | 1.36 |
1hr Supercycling, RK4 | 1.39 |
2hr Supercycling, RK4 | 1.42 |
4hr Supercycling, RK4 | 1.44 |
Per issue title, what further verification is required? This currently only gives compute efficiency for the various cases.
from mpas-model.
@bradyrx, this is strange. Does this suggest that running in "standard" mode with compute_dt
, no super-cycling, is faster than any supercycled case with RK4? RK4 has about 2X the computational cost, so this makes sense.
I would suspect that No Supercycling, RK2 and compute_dt = 2*dt
should be about the same, at least for standalone. Does this type of scaling make sense for compute?
I'm thinking this implies the runtime is dominated by the LIGHT IO. Is this the case for these runs (e.g., what is compute / IO)?
2hr vs 4hr supercycling with RK4 should be a speedup of about 2X for the compute bit of LIGHT. Is this what you are seeing in the log files? I'm not sure you really want to do advection at a longer time step than 4hrs.
from mpas-model.
Related Issues (20)
- Verify that LIGHT works under current 18to6 resolution HOT 1
- Particle entrainment parameterization
- Free floating particle top and bottom cell treatment HOT 1
- Where to set supercycling length? HOT 4
- Add `config_AM_lagrPartTrack_timeIntegration` to E3SM
- Update particle output stream to include global cell ID and lat/lon HOT 1
- Update E3SM defaults following merge HOT 2
- Coarsening horizontal particle resolution currently unfeasible for high resolution HOT 1
- pyAMG coarsening improperly applied in 3 dimensions HOT 4
- New regression suite tests needed for new particle behaviors
- Particle creation script fails if pyamg is not available
- Test automated MPAS script for non-IC clusters
- Cleanup framework helper function
- verticalTreatment should just be dimensions `nParticles` HOT 1
- Append instantaneous velocity to lagrPartTrack output HOT 4
- Output global cell ID HOT 6
- Scalar interpolation should also include horizontal interpolation HOT 3
- Ensure outputed indexLevels correct HOT 11
- RK4 should be default (in super cycling cases) HOT 2
Recommend Projects
-
React
A declarative, efficient, and flexible JavaScript library for building user interfaces.
-
Vue.js
🖖 Vue.js is a progressive, incrementally-adoptable JavaScript framework for building UI on the web.
-
Typescript
TypeScript is a superset of JavaScript that compiles to clean JavaScript output.
-
TensorFlow
An Open Source Machine Learning Framework for Everyone
-
Django
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.
-
Laravel
A PHP framework for web artisans
-
D3
Bring data to life with SVG, Canvas and HTML. 📊📈🎉
-
Recommend Topics
-
javascript
JavaScript (JS) is a lightweight interpreted programming language with first-class functions.
-
web
Some thing interesting about web. New door for the world.
-
server
A server is a program made to process requests and deliver data to clients.
-
Machine learning
Machine learning is a way of modeling and interpreting data that allows a piece of software to respond intelligently.
-
Visualization
Some thing interesting about visualization, use data art
-
Game
Some thing interesting about game, make everyone happy.
Recommend Org
-
Facebook
We are working to build community through open source technology. NB: members must have two-factor auth.
-
Microsoft
Open source projects and samples from Microsoft.
-
Google
Google ❤️ Open Source for everyone.
-
Alibaba
Alibaba Open Source for everyone
-
D3
Data-Driven Documents codes.
-
Tencent
China tencent open source team.
from mpas-model.