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

Job has non-deterministic results due to RRTMGP #2721

Closed
nefrathenrici opened this issue Feb 26, 2024 · 5 comments
Closed

Job has non-deterministic results due to RRTMGP #2721

nefrathenrici opened this issue Feb 26, 2024 · 5 comments

Comments

@nefrathenrici
Copy link
Member

nefrathenrici commented Feb 26, 2024

Job ID: sphere_aquaplanet_rhoe_equilmoist_allsky_gw_raw_zonallyasymmetric
This is likely caused by cloud-radiation interactions in the simulation added after #2704 .

@nefrathenrici nefrathenrici changed the title Job ID sphere_aquaplanet_rhoe_equilmoist_allsky_gw_raw_zonallyasymmetric has non-deterministic results due to RRTMGP Job has non-deterministic results due to RRTMGP Feb 26, 2024
@szy21
Copy link
Member

szy21 commented Mar 5, 2024

I did some test by looking at the norm of the solution. This may not be as accurate as MSE, but it shows:
FT32 simulation with FT32 radiation: non-determinisitic
FT64 simulation with FT64 radiation: non-deterministic
FT32 simulation with FT64 radiation (which is the same as what we have before): deterministic

@dennisYatunin suggested that maybe radiation is always not deterministic, but in the FT32 simulation with FT64 radiation case, we lose the last few non-deterministic digits when converting from FT64 to FT32. That makes sense to me. I don't think the issue is related to the PR.

@szy21
Copy link
Member

szy21 commented Mar 17, 2024

I think this may have been fixed by the recent fix in RRTMGP. I run the simulation a couple of times on ci and the norm of the resolution is the same. I can add back the regression test. @charleskawczynski is there an easy way to make sure it is reproducible before adding the regression test?

@charleskawczynski
Copy link
Member

I think opting into the regression test is the simplest way

@szy21
Copy link
Member

szy21 commented Mar 17, 2024

Ok, I’ll add it in and keep an eye on the builds.

@szy21
Copy link
Member

szy21 commented Mar 18, 2024

The regression test has been added back in #2798, and the most recent two builds passed, so I think we can close this issue.

@szy21 szy21 closed this as completed Mar 18, 2024
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