Parent Directory | Revision Log | Revision Graph
Links to HEAD: | (view) (download) (annotate) |
Links to checkpoint61h: | (view) (download) (annotate) |
Sticky Tag: |
Changed ICE2WATR to SEAICE_rhoIce/rhoConst for consistency between dynamics and thermodynamics of pkg/seaice. Set ICE2WATR=0.92 to reproduce old output.txt in verification experiments. http://forge.csail.mit.edu/pipermail/mitgcm-devel/2007-October/003053.html
Change reference output for adjoint yet again (after checking that recent fixes reproduce old reference): o SEAICE_EXCLUDE_FOR_EXACT_AD_TESTING o SEAICE_salinity = 0.3 o SEAICE_availHeatFrac = 0.8
o Something seems wrong with EVP adjoint so revert to LSR adjoint o Add SEAICE_SALINITY adjoint
o Add SEAICEadvSnow, SEAICEuseFlooding to adjoint calculation (changes results) o Add init. AREA, HEFF to control vector
o remove SEAICEuseEVP flag o set SEAICE_EVP = 1.E-8 This fixes the 1.E34 gradient, but 1.E-9 would not fix them Question is whether that epsilon is small enough, and why it is so sensitive; Likely culprit is new code in seaice_evp.F: deltaC = SQRT(MAX(deltaC,SEAICE_EPS_SQ)) deltaZ = SQRT(MAX(deltaZ,SEAICE_EPS_SQ))
o in data, remove some default options o in data.seaice, add EVP runtime flags
Initial check-in of lab_sea adjoint (very similar to natl_box_adjoint/code_seaice) * used C-grid and EVP solver * used KPP, GM/Redi * uses inAdExact=.TRUE. * gradient checks fail for both ADM and TLM due to sensitive snow melt code in seaice_grwoth (look for "JZ") f.d. gradients actually seem more problematic than ADM, TLM gradients; issue is related to forward mismatch between g77 an ifort
This form allows you to request diffs between any two revisions of this file. For each of the two "sides" of the diff, select a symbolic revision name using the selection box, or choose 'Use Text Field' and enter a numeric revision.
ViewVC Help | |
Powered by ViewVC 1.1.22 |