[MITgcm-devel] [MITgcm-cvs] MITgcm/pkg/seaice CVS Commit

Gael Forget gforget at MIT.EDU
Tue Jul 19 18:18:02 EDT 2011 

Martin, Jean-Michel and Patrick,

I gave this issue another look. My basic conclusion is that Martin found a bug.

By saving multiple times the whole tice array to tape (in md_seaice_growth) 
we ended up with the post solve4temp values in the tape (except for the last bi/bj).
So ad_seaice_growth, expecting the pre solve4temp values in the tape, was wrong. 

After Patrick's fixes of the bugs Martin added in r137, I believe all is correct in r139 at least
regarding tice, so I think an update of the global_ocean.cs32x15/seaice result is in order.

I encourage you to double check though.

With regard to the other recomputations in global_ocean.cs32x15 (solve_pentadiagonal, 
solve_tridiagonal, gad_implicit_r, freeze_interior, thsice, advect, seaice_advdiff, and 
seaice_lsr), I was under the impression that (except may be for the thsice and 
freeze_interior ones) they were nothing new and they were benign. A thorough 
examination would certainly be of value though.

Cheers,
Gael

On Jul 19, 2011, at 3:50 AM, Martin Losch wrote:

> Hi Jean-Michel, Patrick
> 
> so I guess that we can live with this, especially, since the change was about (redundant) bi/bj-loops? 
> 
> I do not know about the taf_ad.log. There are a lot of recomputation warnings related to vertical implicit advection and thsice, both I have little experience with. But they are not affected by my changes.
> 
> Martin
> 
> On Jul 18, 2011, at 4:59 PM, Jean-Michel Campin wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> The latest testreport With the 2nd fix (from today, tapes and keys):
>> global_ocean.cs32x15.seaice has 12 matching digits (10 before)
>> lab_sea is back at 16 (13 before)
>> and lab_sea.evp is passing with 13 digits (12 before) 
>> All three were passing with 16 digits last Friday.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Jean-Michel
>> 
>> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 09:46:07AM -0400, Patrick Heimbach wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi there,
>>> 
>>> no, it didn't completely fix the problem, i.e.
>>> still deviations on baudelaire.
>>> I haven't had time to look into this in more detail,
>>> just tried to do the obvious fixes between airport gates.
>>> 
>>> There were two bugs:
>>> 1. line length (fix on Sat.)
>>> 2. wrong tapes and keys (fixed today)
>>> 
>>> The second one can conceivably change the result for tests that have bi/bj > 1
>>> 
>>> There are likely more problems.
>>> Looks like the taf_ad.log hasn't been looked at in a while...
>>> 
>>> Cheers
>>> -p.
>>> 
>>> On Jul 18, 2011, at 9:32 AM, Jean-Michel Campin wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Hi Martin,
>>>> 
>>>> I am going to re-run the standard test. Will give an update soon.
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Jean-Michel
>>>> 
>>>> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 03:21:29PM +0200, Martin Losch wrote:
>>>>> Hi there,
>>>>> did Patrick's second fix fix the problem (I forgot to adjust the keys when I changed the store directives, still not clear to my why it did work for me)? I am now getting 12 digits for global_ocean.cs32x15.seaice and 13 for lab_sea.evp on my machine with seaice_growth.F v1.139. The change to v1.136 that makes this difference is exactly the change of the storing. 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Did I introduce a bug, or do we need to update the output files?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Martin
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Jul 18, 2011, at 9:49 AM, Martin Losch wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hi Jean-Michel,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I guess the TAF error was fixed by Patrick (it ran all OK for me, I don't understand what happened), lines were too long (thanks, Patrick).
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I do not know why the gradient of global_ocean.cs32x15.seaice changed, again, for my platform it was all OK. Only three experiments seem to be affected: lab_sea, lab_sea.evp (which I assume is very unstable) and global_ocean.cs32x15.seaice (also on faulks). I changed a little bit of storage: instead of
>>>>>> CADJ STORE tice, ....
>>>>>> we now have
>>>>>> CADJ STORE tice(:,:,bi,bj)
>>>>>> (and similar for tices) in analogy to all other STORE directives. This means that in the adjoint code we no longer have code that copies 4D arrays within the bi/bj-loops. I can imagine that can have an effect on the numerical precision (although it shouldn't). In Ian's code (FENTY_AREA_EXPANSION_CONTRACTION) I added 3 lines:
>>>>>> d_AREAbyATM(I,J) = 0. _d 0
>>>>>> d_AREAbyICE(I,J) = 0. _d 0
>>>>>> d_AREAbyOCN(I,J) = 0. _d 0
>>>>>> but that part of the code is not tested in global_ocean.cs32x15.seaice nor lab_sea, as far as I can see. The other stuff I did (contracted two #ifdfe's into one) is not tested either. 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I'll have a closer look later.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Martin
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On mitgcm.org/testing/results I see on beaudelaire for gfortran:
>>>>>>> run: ./testreport -adm -a jmc at mitgcm.org -match 13 -of=../tools/build_options/linux_amd64_gfortran+mpi_generic -MPI 6 -command 'mpirun -np TR_NPROC ./mitgcmuv_ad'
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Fri Jul 15 02:47:14 EDT 2011
>>>>>>> Y Y Y Y 16>12<FAIL  global_ocean.cs32x15.seaice
>>>>>>> Y Y Y Y 16>16<pass  lab_sea
>>>>>>> Y Y Y Y 16>12<FAIL  lab_sea.evp
>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> Sun Jul 17 02:46:03 EDT 2011
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Y Y Y Y 16>10<FAIL  global_ocean.cs32x15.seaice
>>>>>>> Y Y Y Y 16>13<pass  lab_sea
>>>>>>> Y Y Y Y 16>12<FAIL  lab_sea.evp
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> for 
>>>>>>> Fri Jul 15 01:03:19 EDT 2011
>>>>>>> run: ./testreport -adm -a jmc at mitgcm.org -match 13 -of=../tools/build_options/linux_amd64_gfortran
>>>>>>> Y Y Y Y 16>16<pass  global_ocean.cs32x15.seaice
>>>>>>> Y Y Y Y 16>16<pass  lab_sea
>>>>>>> Y Y Y Y 16>16<pass  lab_sea.evp
>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> Sun Jul 17 01:03:23 EDT 2011
>>>>>>> Y Y Y Y 16>10<FAIL  global_ocean.cs32x15.seaice
>>>>>>> Y Y Y Y 16>13<pass  lab_sea
>>>>>>> Y Y Y Y 16>12<FAIL  lab_sea.evp
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Jul 16, 2011, at 2:42 PM, Jean-Michel Campin wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hi Martin,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Looks like there is a problem in the changes you made in seaice_growth.F:
>>>>>>> TAF returns an error for lab_sea experiment (all last night AD lab_sea tests 
>>>>>>> I loooked at failed). 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The gradient of global_ocean.cs32x15.seaice also changed (from 16.digits
>>>>>>> to only 10 on ref. platform=baudelaire+gfortran) so that it's now
>>>>>>> returnning a "FAIL". Was it expected ? Do we need to update
>>>>>>> output_adm.seaice.txt ?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>> Jean-Michel
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 09:01:07AM -0400, Martin Losch wrote:
>>>>>>>> Update of /u/gcmpack/MITgcm/pkg/seaice
>>>>>>>> In directory forge:/tmp/cvs-serv6974/pkg/seaice
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Modified Files:
>>>>>>>> 	seaice_growth.F 
>>>>>>>> Log Message:
>>>>>>>> - fix recomputation with FENTY_AREA_EXPANSION_CONTRACTION code,
>>>>>>>> remove then obsolete STORE directives
>>>>>>>> - fix STORE directives for tice and tices, so that only the
>>>>>>>> appropriate part of the fields are stored (and not the entire
>>>>>>>> field)
>>>>>>>> - cosmetic changes: adjust CPP flags and indentation for better
>>>>>>>> legibilty
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> MITgcm-cvs mailing list
>>>>>>>> MITgcm-cvs at mitgcm.org
>>>>>>>> http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-cvs
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> MITgcm-devel mailing list
>>>>>>> MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
>>>>>>> http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-devel
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Martin Losch
>>>>>> Martin.Losch at awi.de
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> MITgcm-devel mailing list
>>>>>> MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
>>>>>> http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-devel
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> MITgcm-devel mailing list
>>>>> MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
>>>>> http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-devel
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> MITgcm-devel mailing list
>>>> MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
>>>> http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-devel
>>> 
>>> ---
>>> Patrick Heimbach | heimbach at mit.edu | http://www.mit.edu/~heimbach
>>> MIT | EAPS 54-1420 | 77 Massachusetts Ave | Cambridge MA 02139 USA
>>> FON +1-617-253-5259 | FAX +1-617-253-4464 | SKYPE patrick.heimbach
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> MITgcm-devel mailing list
>>> MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
>>> http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-devel
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> MITgcm-devel mailing list
>> MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
>> http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-devel
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> MITgcm-devel mailing list
> MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
> http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-devel

More information about the MITgcm-devel mailing list