...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
Allow a 5-minute overview for each topic during the breakout session, with details available in posters (see below), if needed, to allow plenty of discussion/Q&A time.
Include this info for model development plans, or be prepared to discuss them:
coordination with simulation campaigns
v3 / v4 priorities (i.e. what might not get done)
Breakout 1: Monday June 26th, 1-2pm, MDT
Breakout Room 2, Telluride
Model stewardship, performance and testing
...
Discussion topics | who should be there (discussion leads) | comments/notes |
|---|
ice sheet conservation issues
Trevor is out until the end of June
probably not
ice sheet performance issues
performance poster
Polar development testing
new test configurations
CICE-QC
discussion/tutorial
Andrew has slides
slides | |||
|---|---|---|---|
1:00 | sea ice model stewardship:
| 10 min + 5 min discussion highlight in |
Coupled Group session |
, details in |
Ice Group breakout Icepack |
details in CICE Consortium poster |
Performance and other CICE Consortium contributions
poster below
Ecosystem project contributions
?
| ||||||||||||||||
1:15 | performance highlights
| 10 min +10 min discussion CICE Consortium details in poster Primary MALI presentation in Performance Group |
| |||||||||||||
1:35 | Polar development testing tutorial
| 20 min |
|
Breakout 2: Tuesday June 27th, 1:15pm-2:15pm, MDT
Breakout Room 2, Telluride
Bias reduction
This breakout follows the Polar Group’s breakout Tuesday morning, where (hopefully) the Polar Group will highlight the relevant biases.
Discussion topics | who should be there | comments/notes | slides | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
1:15 | MALI plans and progress | 10 min | in MALI slide deck above | |
1:25 | ERA5-forcing and ELM deep snow/firn capabilities |
Chloe (remote) can summarize online poster. CZ cannot attend
MALI initial conditions
short presentation on MALI plans/progress (10-15 min)
Interactive ice sheet development
10 min poster highlight remote |
| |||||
1:35 | Wave-ice interactions |
10 min |
| |||||
1:45 | Variational ridging and orbital evaluation |
Shifted satellite emulator to here as orbital evaluation
Ecosystem project contributions
?
10 min |
| |||||
1:55 | Q&A/discussion | Ice and other E3SM group members, ecosystem projects | 15 min |
Posters
Everyone please add posters or specific topics that you would like to discuss during the breakouts
flash talks to introduce posters in breakout sessions
posters can be in-person or online
in-person posters will have dedicated sessions for discussion
in-depth discussions of online poster can be arranged individually, as needed
Poster Author(s) | Poster title/topic | comments/notes |
|---|---|---|
CICE Consortium highlights and potential contributions to E3SM | Icepack, performance, C-grid |
...
ERA5-forcing and ELM deep snow/firn capabilities | remote | |
Variational Ridging | ||
Notes from Monday breakout
sea ice model stewardship
Elizabeth Hunke: lot of sea ice work going on currently is focused on merging Icepack from the CICE consortium
Icepack enables wave / sea ice interactions in E3SM, by providing a floe size distribution
Andrew Roberts: E3SM simulations show big sea ice biases
is this a coupling problem or are we missing important physics?
too much NH sea ice in winter; too little sea ice in Ant. in winter and summer
we have (arguably) one of the most advanced sea ice models out there, what are we still doing wrong?
list of potential physics culprits … is anything missing from the current list?
things we know about:
sea ice and ocean (coupling) params. / constants are not always consistent; someone can change in one model but not the other and break coupling
atmos. boundary layer flux calculation doesn’t converge with increased iterations
frazil scheme in ocean is not mushy – the ice model takes up seawater along with newly frozen ice
sophisticated radiation phys in sea ice model but the coupling is still very rudimentary; could couple over 3 bands rather than 2; are currently coupling between 2 bands rather than resolving them both
expecting to have very thin ice cover in v3 … how do we combat this?
performance
sea ice perf improvements:
one is reduce mesh at lower latitudes, where ice is unlikely to appear. This is mostly done, needs a mesh to be created
separate dynamics and column physics for coupling, so that atmosphere can run concurrently with sea ice dynamics (EH’s understanding of this is that it results in a physics error related to ice albedo being inconsistent with the final sea ice thickness distribution)
refactor EVP dynamics into a kernel that can run on a single CPU (other groups have shown 10x speedup doing this) or GPU
accelerate EVP subcycling convergence
WWIII perf improvements
reducing number of frequencies used for the wave spectrum does not significantly affect accuracy
variable resolution mesh
port wave action source terms to GPU
MALI perf.
mostly stand-alone work currently; coupling w/ e3sm is in early stages
cpu good strong scaling; gpu poor strong scaling (gpus need more work, not less)
on perlmutter, assembly improves by ~2x with gpus vs cpus only; total solve time cpu vs cpu+gpu remains similar for now
working now on coupled layout on perlmutter (starting from admittedly bad initial layout on Cori)
testing
MALI
hundreds of tests run daily / weekly
diff architectures
diff builds
CDash for reporting results
regression tests (unit tests, mnfctd solos, benchmarks, realistic stand alone configurations)
performance tests (realistic setup and testing of perf over time; monitoring for significant wall-clock time changes over time within two stnd)
CICE-QC testing
determines if two different sims. have the same sea ice climate
discussion PR, ready to merge to E3SM
Andrew Roberts: polar developer tool
bash script to efficiently run many E3SM sims for testing
fulfills several recommendations of code review deep dive (e.g., testing of energy / mass conservation)
currently set up for Chrysalis and Anvil
command line; similar to current “run script” but with more flexibility
PR in; latest version in ‘simulation script’ area of repo
can generate namelist combinations and compare them (example, compare using high-frequency coupling vs. not)
builds all combos at once and then queues them all
can also use it to run preset test suites (e.g, E3SM developers test suite)
“-e” option checks for energy and mass conservation on the fly