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

missing documentation #373

Closed
eclare108213 opened this issue Oct 7, 2021 · 9 comments
Closed

missing documentation #373

eclare108213 opened this issue Oct 7, 2021 · 9 comments

Comments

@eclare108213
Copy link
Contributor

The variable index is empty, there is a problem with the forum link, and also need to clarify where to find the forcing variable information.

Simon Driscoll writes:

I am a PhD student in the Scale Aware Sea Ice Project ("SASIP" - https://sasip-climate.github.io). My research is focusing on machine learning and data assimilation methods for emulating sea ice thermodynamics. We are looking at the Icepack model, and I can see there is a new version: https://zenodo.org/record/5423061#.YV8Hqy8w2Jk (1.3.0) (I tried the listed CICE consortium link is https://xenforo.cgd.ucar.edu/cesm/forums/cice-consortium.146/ which does not work).

Icepack 1.3.0 is said to be a "major release update" (including "advanced snow physics") from Icepack 1.2.5. I am looking for a full list of variables that icepack calculates in its model, as well as all fields needed to force the model (i.e. fields required for the forcing data).

In the documentation for the both the latest model, and the 'master' and 'main' versions, e.g.https://cice-consortium-icepack.readthedocs.io/en/master/icepack_index.htmlthe index of primary variables and parameters is empty. The documentation for the previous version includes in section 6 includes a table of "many" of the symbols/variables used in the model:https://buildmedia.readthedocs.org/media/pdf/cice-consortium-icepack/icepack1.2.5/cice-consortium-icepack.pdf

I was wondering if there was a complete list of variables in the 1.3.0 model (i.e. that are computed), and a list of variables required for forcing the Icepack model available?

@apcraig
Copy link
Contributor

apcraig commented Oct 7, 2021

I found the bug in the variable index and will create a PR to fix that. The NCAR forum seems to be down at the moment, I've sent an email to @dabail10. What else do we want to do about the Icepack forcing documentation? We have a whole section already (https://cice-consortium-icepack.readthedocs.io/en/master/science_guide/sg_boundary_forcing.html), I'm not sure we need to do more?

@eclare108213
Copy link
Contributor Author

I doubt that any list of variables computed in the code will be "complete" because many intermediate things are computed along the way to the final solution. Icepack's diagnostic and history output is also basic/incomplete, but looking at the history output for CICE would provide a fairly comprehensive list of what's available (ignore the dynamics variables, which aren't available in Icepack). I'm not sure whether these are documented anywhere except the code itself and in the CICE diagnostic output (for history variables that are turned on), unfortunately.

@eclare108213
Copy link
Contributor Author

In addition to https://cice-consortium-icepack.readthedocs.io/en/master/science_guide/sg_boundary_forcing.html, further information about the forcing can be gleaned from the forcing data itself, https://github.com/CICE-Consortium/Icepack/wiki/Icepack-Input-Data

@apcraig
Copy link
Contributor

apcraig commented Oct 7, 2021

Another thing I notice, some of the Zenodo links point back to Icepack1.0.0. If you go here,

https://zenodo.org/record/5423061#.YV8-8qBlAqT

You can see that "supplement to" points to Icepack1.0.0. At the same time, the "GITHUB" box also points to 1.0.0. Neither of those links are quite right. They should probably point to Icepack main branch, but not totally sure. I guess formally Icepack 1.3.0 is a supplement to Icepack1.0.0 which is probably why Zenodo is setup that way. But the links are not ideal. Maybe that's OK for now.

@dabail10
Copy link
Contributor

dabail10 commented Oct 7, 2021

Yes, we had a power outage at the Mesa yesterday and they are still trying to recover. In fact, I was at the office for in person meetings this morning but then came home to do Zoom meetings. I'll try to take a look at this tomorrow.

@dabail10
Copy link
Contributor

dabail10 commented Oct 8, 2021

So, what is left to do here?

@apcraig
Copy link
Contributor

apcraig commented Oct 8, 2021

I think we could close this. Did anyone get back to Simon? I see he/she posted something on the forum.

@dabail10
Copy link
Contributor

dabail10 commented Oct 8, 2021

Yes, we have replied on the forum now that it is working again.

@eclare108213
Copy link
Contributor Author

The zenodo weirdness remains, but we could make that a separate issue and include some other issues with zenodo like how datasets are documented there.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants