[MITgcm-devel] problem with maskInC and obcs-balancing in adjoint

[Martin Losch]

Hi Jean-Michel,

I'd be happy with your solution, but actually, these calls:
CALL INI_HFAC( myThid )
CALL INI_DEPTHS( myThid )
CALL INI_MASKS_ETC( myThid )
were introduced in revision 1.48 with the comment "Changes in initialisation needed for NLFS adjoint". Only in revision 1.49, the depth_control stuff is added to the main branch. As far as I remember, these calls are here because TAF needs (or at that time needed) to see the full initialization of the the fields that are then partially updated in, e.g., update_masks_etc
I hope that your solution still works, I'd be happy, if you can test this.

with removed masks I meant this:
<http://mitgcm.org/viewvc/MITgcm/MITgcm/pkg/obcs/OBCS.h?r1=1.26&r2=1.27>
but I realize now that this is not exactly that same stuff.

M.

On Mar 14, 2011, at 4:23 PM, Jean-Michel Campin wrote:

> Hi Martin,
> 
> My personal opinion is that we could put those 2nd calls
> (in initialise_varia) to ini_depth, ini_masks_etc ...
> within #ifdef ALLOW_DEPTH_CONTROL :
> 
> Those 2nd calls were added for this reason, and I think
> there would be a better way to do this ALLOW_DEPTH_CONTROL,
> because all the maskC,W,S are kept constant and only the hFac 
> are modified; This is not different from rStar code, which is
> entirely done within initialise_varia, and works for the adjoint.
> So, until someone re-write this ALLOW_DEPTH_CONTROL thing,
> we could agree that, for now, it's not compatible with obcs.
> 
> Now, you know better than me those issues (ALLOW_DEPTH_CONTROL)
> but I can give it a try to check that my proposition works (which
> I did not yet try).
> 
> And to finish, I don't remember of this:
>> 3. As an alternative, one could re-introduce the "obcs-masks" 
> that you have just removed a few versions ago.
> can you tell us more ?
> 
> Cheers,
> Jean-Michel
> 
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 02:28:40PM +0100, Martin Losch wrote:
>> Hi Jean-Michel, Patrick,
>> 
>> I have the impression that something goes wrong with the balancing code in the adjoint.:
>> The field maskInC has 1 on the open boundary, whereas they should have zeros (as set in obcs_init_fixed). The reason is that there is a ifdef ALLOW_AUTODIFF_TAMC block in initialise_varia, where ini_depth and ini_masks_etc are called, where maskInC is reset to its original value (1 on the boundary). I need to force TAF to call obcs_init_fixed again within this block. What is the preferred option?
>> 1. show obcs_init_fixed to TAF (edit obcs_ad_diff.list)
>> 2. use directives:
>> CADJ SUBROUTINE OBCS_INIT_FIXED INPUT  = 1
>> CADJ SUBROUTINE OBCS_INIT_FIXED OUTPUT =
>> CADJ SUBROUTINE OBCS_INIT_FIXED REQUIRED
>> (edit obcs_ad.flow)
>> 3. As an alternative, one could re-introduce the "obcs-masks" that you have just removed a few versions ago.
>> 
>> 1 and 2 work, haven't tried 3 (because I do not like that option).
>> 
>> Martin
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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