Standard names: new names required as identified in urban climate project [UC]²

[achho]

Achim Holtmann
January 11, 2024

In the research program "Urban Climate Under Change [UC]²" we formed a working group on data management which consisted of members of different research institutions to coordinate standards for sharing observation and model data. Where available, CF standard names were used, however, a number of variables were not found in the standard name tables (the bulk of the variable work was done in 2017).

The variable tables developed by the working group are available here (pdf) and here (csv). In all lines where the column standard_name is empty, no standard name has been found. Name suggestions in the table come from a variety of institutions with different background, including atmospheric measurements and LES-modelling.

As the table is very long, there should be some prioritization regarding which variables could/should be introduced. The research project is already finished, so this process is not urgent. Before suggesting specific names, I wanted to post this more general information and to ask whether there is any preferred procedure to follow now?

[github-actions]

Thank you for your proposal. These terms will be added to the cfeditor (http://cfeditor.ceda.ac.uk/proposals/1) shortly. Your proposal will then be reviewed and commented on by the community and Standard Names moderator.

[JonathanGregory]

The standard name moderators can probably advise about this, thanks. @japamment @feggleton @efisher008.

[efisher008]

These names have been discussed externally in WCRP-CORDEX/data-request-table#17.

One was accepted as bedrock_depth_below_ground_level (#205). On the basis of discussion about area fraction names in #24 it was decided not to introduce the other two names lake_area_fraction and urban_area_fraction, but instead to use the existing area_fraction standard name with cell_methods area: mean where fresh_free_water and area: mean where urban.

The use of the area type fresh_free_water for a lake area was further discussed in #62 and externally in WCRP-CORDEX/data-request-table#24, and it was officially proposed to add lake and river as area types to the CF area type table in #65. This is currently being dealt with on this issue (#65) in the new vocabularies repo.

[jesusff]

I'm not sure the question of the OP was addressed, as they proposed a large amount of variables for which they found no CF standard_name. Some of them fall within existing standard names, but new area types would need to be defined, apart from those discussed in the CORDEX issues above.

[efisher008]

Dear Jesus @jesusff,

I apologise for misunderstanding that the issue had concluded! I have reopened this and would welcome more discussion (or further comments from the original poster @achho).

Best regards,
Ellie

[achho]

Hi,

thanks for coming back to this topic. My main intention was to point out that there are still a number of variables without a standard name that are used by different working groups. I know of another urban climate project that underwent a similar process of agreeing on variable names for which no standard names were avaiable, and which used the names in the tables posted by me above instead. So I think there is still a need for the standardization of a number of the variables.

Thanks again,
Achim

[jesusff]

Thank you for reopening, Ellie. @achho in the CORDEX FPS-URB-RCC we are also planning to introduce urban-related variables into CF (much less than your proposal above...). We are planning a meeting to have a consensus on the needs and wording, to meet the demands of different communities in the field. Maybe someone from your WG would be willing to join.

Regarding your list of variables above, I wonder if it would be worth to have an external resource within CF, such as a chemical_compound table, to have a generic standard_name such as mole_fraction_of_chemical_compound_in_air and an additional metadata to select the compound from the standard list. Surely, this option has already been discussed.

[JonathanGregory]

Dear Jesus @jesusff

The use of generic standard names for chemical species was discussed a few times years ago when the number of chemical species requested in standard names began to grow quickly. However, the consensus was against it, including the atmospheric chemists who requested the standard names. Certainly there would be fewer standard names in the table if we had followed that approach, but it hasn't got unmanageably large. If it did, we would certainly have to reconsider this decision. By contrast, it was decided to have generic names such as mass_concentration_of_biological_taxon_expressed_as_carbon_in_sea_water for biological taxa, because the number of those is orders of magnitude larger, and they already have unique identifiers in external tables. Again, this was a consensus decision.

Best wishes

Jonathan

[jesusff]

Thank you, yes, I imagined that this was a recurrent topic. The request above mentions 118 new compounds that they couldn't find in the standard names.

mole fraction of 1-1-dimethylcyclohexane in air
mole fraction of 1-2-3-4-tetramethylbenzene in air
mole fraction of 1-2-3-5-tetramethylbenzene in air
mole fraction of 1-2-3-trimethylbenzene in air
mole fraction of 1-2-4-5-tetramethylbenzene in air
mole fraction of 1-2-butadiene in air
mole fraction of 1-2-dimethyl-4-ethylbenzene in air
mole fraction of 1-2-methyl isopropylbenzene in air
mole fraction of 1-2-methyl-n-propylbenzene in air
mole fraction of 1-3-butadiene in air
mole fraction of 1-3-dimethyl-2-ethylbenzene in air
mole fraction of 1-3-dimethyl-4-ethylbenzene in air
mole fraction of 1-3-methyl-isopropylbenzene in air
mole fraction of 1-3-methyl-n-propylbenzene in air
mole fraction of 1-butanol in air
mole fraction of 1-ethenyl-3-ethylbenzene in air
mole fraction of 1-heptene in air
mole fraction of 1-methylcyclohexene in air
mole fraction of 1-pentene in air
mole fraction of 1-propanol in air
mole fraction of 1-propenylbenzene in air
mole fraction of 1cis-2trans-4-trimethylcyclopentane in air
mole fraction of 2-2-4-trimethylpentane in air
mole fraction of 2-2-dimethylbutane in air
mole fraction of 2-3-4-trimethylpentane in air
mole fraction of 2-3-dihydroindene in air
mole fraction of 2-3-dimethyl-2-pentene in air
mole fraction of 2-3-dimethylbutane in air
mole fraction of 2-3-dimethylpentane in air
mole fraction of 2-4-dimethylhexane in air
mole fraction of 2-4-dimethylpentane in air
mole fraction of 2-5-dimethylhexane in air
mole fraction of 2-6-dimethyloctane in air
mole fraction of 2-butanol in air
mole fraction of 2-ethyltoluene in air
mole fraction of 2-methyl-1-butene in air
mole fraction of 2-methyl-2-butene in air
mole fraction of 2-methyl-heptane in air
mole fraction of 2-methylbutane in air
mole fraction of 2-methylhexane in air
mole fraction of 2-methylpentane in air
mole fraction of 2-phenylpentane in air
mole fraction of 2-propanol in air
mole fraction of 3-6-dimethyloctane in air
mole fraction of 3-ethyltoluene in air
mole fraction of 3-methyl-heptane in air
mole fraction of 3-methylhexane in air
mole fraction of 3-methylpentane in air
mole fraction of 4-ethenyl-1-2-dimethylbenzene in air
mole fraction of 4-ethyltoluene in air
mole fraction of 4-methyl-heptane in air
mole fraction of 4-methyloctane in air
mole fraction of 5-methylnonane in air
mole fraction of alpha-phellandrene in air
mole fraction of alpha-pinene in air
mole fraction of alpha-terpinene in air
mole fraction of beta pinene in air
mole fraction of butanal in air
mole fraction of butanone in air
mole fraction of butylbenzene in air
mole fraction of cis-1-2-dimethylcyclopentane in air
mole fraction of cis-1-3-cyclopentane in air
mole fraction of cis-1-3-dimethylcyclohexane in air
mole fraction of cis-1-4-dimethylcyclohexane in air
mole fraction of cis-2-hexene in air
mole fraction of cis-3-ethylmethylcyclopentane in air
mole fraction of cis-butene in air
mole fraction of cis-pentene in air
mole fraction of cyclohexane in air
mole fraction of cyclopentene in air
mole fraction of d2-carene in air
mole fraction of d3-carene in air
mole fraction of decane in air
mole fraction of diethyl-1-3-benzene in air
mole fraction of diethyl-1-4-benzene in air
mole fraction of dodecane in air
mole fraction of e-beta-ocimene in air
mole fraction of ethylbenzene in air
mole fraction of ethylcycloheptane in air
mole fraction of ethylcyclopentane in air
mole fraction of heptane in air
mole fraction of hexanal in air
mole fraction of hexane in air
mole fraction of isobutane in air
mole fraction of isobutene and 1-butene in air
mole fraction of isopropylbenzene in air
mole fraction of isopropylcyclopentane in air
mole fraction of m-p-xylene in air
mole fraction of mesitylene in air
mole fraction of methacrolein in air
mole fraction of methyl vinyl ketone in air
mole fraction of methylcyclohexane in air
mole fraction of methylcyclopentane in air
mole fraction of myrcene in air
mole fraction of n-butylcyclopentane in air
mole fraction of naphthalene in air
mole fraction of nonane in air
mole fraction of o-xylene in air
mole fraction of octane in air
mole fraction of pentanal in air
mole fraction of pentane in air
mole fraction of propanal in air
mole fraction of propylbenzene in air
mole fraction of propyne in air
mole fraction of sabinene in air
mole fraction of styrene in air
mole fraction of t-butylbenzene in air
mole fraction of terpinolene in air
mole fraction of trans-1-3-dimethylcyclopentane in air
mole fraction of trans-1-3-hexadiene in air
mole fraction of trans-1-4-dimethylcyclohexane in air
mole fraction of trans-2-hexene in air
mole fraction of trans-3-ethylmethylcyclopentane in air
mole fraction of trans-butene in air
mole fraction of trans-pentene in air
mole fraction of undecane in air
mole fraction of water in air
mole fraction of z-beta-ocimene in air

[JonathanGregory]

There are currently about 130 mole_fraction_of_X_in_air names, so the addition of another 118 wouldn't be extraordinary. I am concerned about the danger of providing more than one name for the same species, though. As far as I know, we don't have a rule about how chemical species should be named. Are these all IUPAC names, for example? Is that the right standard? Does it specify a unique name for any molecule? Also, when I was at school, we learned to put commas, not hyphens, in names such as 1,2,3,4-tetramethylbenzene. Has that changed? There are no commas in standard names at present, but I don't know a good argument why there shouldn't be if there's a definite need. I wonder whether @fmoconnor might have a view?

[efisher008]

when I was at school, we learned to put commas, not hyphens, in names such as 1,2,3,4-tetramethylbenzene. Has that changed?

In answer to your comment @JonathanGregory, this had not changed at the time I was studying chemistry at school!

[achho]

We are planning a meeting to have a consensus on the needs and wording, to meet the demands of different communities in the field. Maybe someone from your WG would be willing to join.

Thanks, that sounds like a good idea. I will ask around in my working group. I myself will be out of office for a few months.

[fmoconnor]

Thanks @JonathanGregory for including me in this discussion. It's quite a long list but as @JonathanGregory suggests, I don't think it is unmanageable. As you say, these look to be IUPAC names, but using hyphens rather than commas. I guess one important aspect is to ensure that you cover some common names as aliases if/when these are implemented.

[JonathanGregory]

Thanks, Fiona @fmoconnor. We use aliases for standard names when we have changed our mind, rather than as synonyms by design. For each new species, we should decide whether to use a common name instead of a IUPAC name, if they are different. It would be helpful if we could think of a sensible policy for making a consistent decision about that.

[github-actions]

This issue has had no activity in the last 30 days. Accordingly:

• If you proposed this issue or have contributed to the
  discussion, please reply to any outstanding concerns.
• If there has been little or no discussion, please comment
  on this issue, to assist with reaching a decision.
• If the proposal seems to have come to a consensus, please
  wait for the moderators to take the next steps towards
  acceptance.

Standard name moderators are also reminded to review @feggleton @japamment @efisher008