Feature #2321 tc_diag_changes

[JohnHalleyGotway]

Expected Differences

• Do these changes introduce new tools, command line arguments, or configuration file options? [Yes]
  
  If yes, please describe:
  

  • Switch to using diagnostic source names CIRA_DIAG_RT and SHIPS_DIAG_RT.
  • Adds TC-Pairs diag_info_map configuration option.
  • Move diag_name config option inside the larger diag_info_map option to define diagnostics metadata.
  • Rename diag_convert_map.source to diag_convert_map.diag_source for consistency, and support partial string matching in that context.
  • Remove model=string sub-option for the -diag command line option since it's replaced by diag_info_map.match_to_track.

• Do these changes modify the structure of existing or add new output data types (e.g. statistic line types or NetCDF variables)? [Yes]
  
  If yes, please describe:
  

  • Add 2 new TCDIAG output columns for TRACK_SOURCE and FIELD_SOURCE.

Pull Request Testing

• Describe testing already performed for these changes:
  

  • Compiled locally and ran unit_tc_pairs.xml to confirm that they all run.
  • Will use GHA for this PR to update the input test dataset and check for unexpected diffs.

• Recommend testing for the reviewer(s) to perform, including the location of input datasets, and any additional instructions:
  

  • @KathrynNewman please review configuration file changes, user's guide updates, and also test on seneca:
    /d1/projects/MET/MET_pull_requests/met-11.0.0/met-11.0.0-beta5/feature_2321/MET-feature_2321_tc_diag_changes
  • @jvigh please review diagnostic settings in the TC-Pairs config file diag_info_map and confirm that these are correct.
  • @georgemccabe please review the code changes and configuration file updates.

• Do these changes include sufficient documentation updates, ensuring that no errors or warnings exist in the build of the documentation? [Yes]

  • Updates the TC-Pairs documentation about diagnostics by merging changes from @jvigh's branch.
  • Updates the description of TC-Pairs command line options, configuration options, and the TCDIAG line type.

• Do these changes include sufficient testing updates? [Yes]

  • I kept the same test in place, but I reorganized the input diagnostics data files to match our updated naming conventions.

• Will this PR result in changes to the test suite? [Yes]
  
  If yes, describe the new output and/or changes to the existing output:
  

  • Adds 2 new output columns to the TCDIAG line type.
  • One TC-Pairs output file is modified (al092022_20220926_DIAGNOSTICS.tcst), but only by the addition of the TRACK_SOURCE and FIELD_SOURCE columns. The actual data values are NOT changed.

• Please complete this pull request review by [Wed 11/16/2022].
  

Pull Request Checklist

See the METplus Workflow for details.

• Review the source issue metadata (required labels, projects, and milestone).
• Complete the PR definition above.
• Ensure the PR title matches the feature or bugfix branch name.
• Define the PR metadata, as permissions allow.
  Select: Reviewer(s)
  Select: Organization level software support Project or Repository level development cycle Project
  Select: Milestone as the version that will include these changes
• After submitting the PR, select Development with the original issue number.
• After the PR is approved, merge your changes. If permissions do not allow this, request that the reviewer do the merge.
• Close the linked issue and delete your feature or bugfix branch from GitHub.

[georgemccabe]

These code changes look good to me. I didn't see anything glaringly incorrect. I will use this info to update the METplus logic for PR dtcenter/METplus#1932

[JohnHalleyGotway]

I inspected the differences flagged in this GHA run. And I see that there is a problem in the TCDIAG output written by the TC-Stat tool.

I'll work on fixing that now.

[jvigh]

I just had one minor edit for clarity in the documentation section.

[KathrynNewman]

The default settings for diag_source="SHIPS_DIAG_RT"; are:
track_source = "OFCL";
match_to_track=["OFCL"];

This results in warning messages that the track locations do not match the diagnostic location. This may result in confusion for a user running with the default settings.

After discussion with @JohnHalleyGotway - proposed changes are to only print a warning about locations NOT matching when diag_info_map.track_source = diag_info_map.match_to_track. When they do not match, print a DEBUG(4) log message.

The default track_source needs to change for SHIPS_DIAG_RT for this to work. John consulted Jonathan for advice on what to use for this string.

[JohnHalleyGotway]

Thanks for the feedback @KathrynNewman. I've made the requested changes in this commit and am re-requesting your review.

[KathrynNewman]

Mark says: "The SHIPS model includes its own "tracker" - so, rather than the SHIPS model itself, I recommend stating along a GFS forecast track defined by a SHIPS specific tracker. (or internal SHIPS tracker?) @jvigh, do you agree? The disclaimer that the SHIPS tracker doesn't appear in the NHC adeck is important (good add!).

[JohnHalleyGotway]

Done:

• SHIPS_DIAG_RT: Real-time SHIPS diagnostics computed from a NWP model such as the Global Forecast System (GFS) model along a GFS forecast track defined by a SHIPS-specific tracker. Note that these SHIPS-derived forecast tracks do not appear in the NHC adeck data.

[KathrynNewman]

Looks good - thanks!

[jvigh]

I'm just coming online now after a busy day running kids around to appointments. Yes, I agree with what @kathryn Newman ***@***.***> proposes. The SHIPS_TRK is a reasonable choice. Or maybe even SHIPS_DEV_TRK. Jonathan Vigh Project Scientist I, Joint Numerical Testbed Research Applications Laboratory (RAL) National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) P.O. Box 3000 tel: +1 (303) 497-8205 Boulder, CO 80307-3000 fax: +1 (303) 497-8171Jonathan's Staff Web Page <http://staff.ral.ucar.edu/jvigh/> (CV, publications, etc.)Tropical Cyclone Guidance Project <http://hurricanes.ral.ucar.edu/> (real-time hurricane data) Tropical Cyclone Data Project <https://verif.rap.ucar.edu/tcdata/> (FLIGHT+, VDM+, TC-OBS datasets) HurricaneRiskCalculator®️ <https://wxrisk.io/> (Now available -- Personalized hurricane wind hazard assessments for decision support) During COVID-19, my working day is likely different from your working day. Please do not feel obliged to reply to this email outside of your normal working hours.

…

On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 1:40 PM KathrynNewman ***@***.***> wrote: ***@***.**** requested changes on this pull request. Mark says: "The SHIPS model includes its own "tracker" - so, rather than *the SHIPS model itself*, I recommend stating *along a GFS forecast track defined by a SHIPS specific tracker*. (or *internal SHIPS tracker*?) @jvigh <https://github.com/jvigh>, do you agree? The disclaimer that the SHIPS tracker doesn't appear in the NHC adeck is important (good add!). — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#2347 (review)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AEWD6VQ5ZNQWJ5APMCGO47DWIVBFBANCNFSM6AAAAAASBN2KV4> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>