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

Feature 360 mode csi #396

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jul 30, 2024
Merged

Feature 360 mode csi #396

merged 3 commits into from
Jul 30, 2024

Conversation

bikegeek
Copy link
Collaborator

Pull Request Testing

  • Describe testing already performed for these changes:

  • updated METviewer development version on 'dakota' to use the changes made in METcalcpy for calculating the OBJCSI and OBJACSI (equations are consistent with the METviewer documentation and in the agg_stat_bootstrap.R code in METviewer)

  • loaded the XML config file from the test used to test the METviewer changes in issue #561:

plot_20240215_190637.xml.txt

  • Modified the run by selecting the 'Use python' under the Common menu
  • Compared Y1 Points generated from the Python-generated plot to the plot_20240215_190637.points1 generated in the METviewer issue #561 testing:

From changes made to Rscript (METviewer issue #561):
plot_20240215_190637.points1.txt

From changes made to the METcalcpy equations:

0.944785 0.944785 0.944785
0.559420 0.559420 0.559420
  • Compared the generated plot to the plot generated in testing for METviewer Issue #561:

R-script generated plot:
plot_20240215_190637

Python script generated plot (i.e. with METcalcpy equation updates)

plot_20240726_171317

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

  • create any additional MODE CSI plots on the METviewer instance on 'dakota' and verify that the trends for the OBJCSI and OBJACSI plots are consistent with expected behavior.

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

  • Do these changes include sufficient testing updates? [No]

  • Will this PR result in changes to the test suite? [No]

    If yes, describe the new output and/or changes to the existing output:

  • Do these changes introduce new SonarQube findings? [No]

    If yes, please describe:

  • Please complete this pull request review by Earliest convenience.

Pull Request Checklist

See the METplus Workflow for details.

  • Add any new Python packages to the METplus Components Python Requirements table.
  • 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) and Development issue
    Select: Milestone as the version that will include these changes
    Select: Coordinated METplus-X.Y Support project for bugfix releases or METcalcpy-X.Y.Z Development project for official releases
  • After submitting the PR, select the ⚙️ icon in the Development section of the right hand sidebar. Search for the issue that this PR will close and select it, if it is not already selected.
  • 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.

… Discussion #2496 for calculating the OBJCSI value corresponding to the calcOBJCSI function that is also implemented in R in the METviewer code.
Copy link
Contributor

@CPKalb CPKalb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Plotted object based CSI in METviewer with the changes and verified that the results look reasonable

@bikegeek bikegeek merged commit 2f1aeec into develop Jul 30, 2024
7 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Status: 🏁 Done
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

MODE CSI calculations result in spurious results
2 participants