Open aidanheerdegen opened 2 months ago
Here is a proposed directory structure
.
├── /g/data/vk83/experiments/inputs/access-esm1p5/
├── ocean/
│ ├── biogeochemistry/
│ │ └── global.1deg/
│ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ ├── bgc_param.nc
│ │ ├── cfc_auscom.nc
│ │ ├── co2_obs.nc
│ │ ├── dust.nc
│ │ ├── ocmip2_abiotic_c14_atm_hist_om3_bc-1-9999.nc
│ │ ├── ocmip2_fice_monthly_om1p5_bc.nc
│ │ ├── ocmip2_press_monthly_om1p5_bc.nc
│ │ ├── ocmip2_siple_co2_atm_am2_bc-1-9999.nc
│ │ └── ocmip2_xkw_monthly_om1p5_bc.nc
│ ├── grids/
│ │ └── mosaic/
│ │ └── global.1deg/
│ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ └── grid_spec.nc
│ ├── shortwave_penetration/
│ │ └── global.1deg/
│ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ └── ssw_atten_depth.nc
│ └── tides/
│ └── global.1deg/
│ └── 2020.05.19/
│ ├── roughness_amp.nc
│ └── tideamp.nc
├── atmosphere/
│ ├── land/
│ │ ├── biogeochem/
│ │ │ └── global.1deg/
│ │ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ │ ├── modis_phenology_csiro.txt
│ │ │ └── pftlookup_csiro_v16_17tiles_wtlnds.csv
│ │ ├── biogeophys/
│ │ │ └── global.1deg/
│ │ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ │ ├── def_soil_params.txt
│ │ │ └── def_veg_params.txt
│ │ ├── climatology/
│ │ │ └── global.1deg/
│ │ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ │ ├── qrclim.slt
│ │ │ └── qrclim.smow
│ │ ├── soiltype/
│ │ │ └── global.1deg/
│ │ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ │ └── qrparm.soil_igbp_vg
│ │ └── vegetation/
│ │ └── global.1deg/
│ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ └── cable_vegfunc_N96.anc
│ ├── aerosol/
│ │ └── global.1deg/
│ │ └── 2020.05.19 /
│ │ ├── ozone_1850_ESM1.anc
│ │ ├── BC_hi_1850_ESM1.anc
│ │ ├── Bio_1850_ESM1.anc
│ │ ├── biogenic_351sm.N96L38
│ │ └── scycl_1850_ESM1_v4.anc
│ ├── chemistry/
│ │ └── global.1deg/
│ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ ├── DMS_conc.N96
│ │ └── sulpc_oxidants_N96_L38
│ ├── grids/
│ │ └── global.1deg/
│ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ ├── qrparm.mask
│ │ └── vertlevs_G3
│ ├── spectral/
│ │ └── global.1deg/
│ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ ├── spec3a_lw_hadgem1_6on
│ │ └── spec3a_sw_hadgem1_6on
│ ├── forcing/
│ │ └── global.1deg/
│ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ └── volcts_18502000ave.dat
│ └── unknown/
│ ├── Ndep_1850_ESM1.anc
│ └── OCFF_1850_ESM1.anc
├── coupler/
│ ├── grids/
│ │ └── global.1deg/
│ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ ├── areas.nc
│ │ ├── grids.nc
│ │ └── masks.nc
│ └── remapping_weights/
│ └── global.1deg/
│ └── 2020.05.19 /
│ ├── rmp_cice_to_um1t_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc
│ ├── rmp_cice_to_um1u_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc
│ ├── rmp_cice_to_um1v_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc
│ ├── rmp_um1t_to_cice_CONSERV_DESTAREA.nc
│ ├── rmp_um1t_to_cice_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc
│ ├── rmp_um1u_to_cice_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc
│ └── rmp_um1v_to_cice_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc
├── ice/
│ ├── grids/
│ │ └── global.1deg/
│ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ ├── grid.nc
│ │ └── kmt.nc
│ └── climatology/
│ └── global.1deg/
│ └── 2020.05.19/
│ └── monthly_sstsss.nc
├── stash/
│ ├── stasets
│ └── STASHmaster
It is viewable/editable here*%20%20JW*KJ%3DJ%5BQ%3DX%5BXU%2BXrmp_W%5CnXJ*Y%5D.ancZ.ncj_monthly_om1p5bcZ%22%2Fg%2Fdata%2Fvk83%2Fexperiments%2F%23Xocmip2%24ts%2Faccess-esm1p5%2FW%25cice_to_um1%26_to_cice%2B_CONSERV_FRACNNEIZ%2CWgrids%3A_bc-1-9999Z%23%3Bw_hadgem1_6on%3CatmosphereW%3Dglobal.1deg%3E_params.txt%3Fclimatology%40biogeochem%5B2020.05.19%5D_1850_ESM1%01%5D%5B%40%3F%3E%3D%3C%3B%3A%2C%2B%26%25%24%23%22jZYXWUQKJ)
I have just used the version (date) as the one in the COECMS access-esm
original directory tree, but I know these are much older than that in general. I've also not checked all those dates thoroughly, just assumed they were all the same, but I would check when rearranging.
@MartinDix can you take a look and tell me what you think. I have pretty much ignored the fact that this is just the pre-industrial, and and waiting for another config to see what files are common and where we might need configuration specific trees.
Note I've done away with the historical "CABLE-AUX" structure, which would entail commensurate changes to paths in the config.
On second thoughts, it probably makes sense to have pre-industrial
in the top level and do the same for other configs, and then try and figure out the commonalities ...
I don't think the split between aerosol/chemistry is useful. ESM1.5 only has enough chemistry for the aerosol scheme so they're essentially the same thing. OCFF (organic carbon from fossil fuel) is an aerosol field. Ndep is nitrogen deposition, so probably part of land/biogeochem.
The model shouldn't be using qrclim.slt, qrclim.smow (soil temperature and moisture climatologies) because it's starting from a complete restart file. Similarly with the ice monthly_sstsss.nc. I'll double check this.
ozone probably sits better in forcing than in aerosol. It's also independent of the ocean model resolution. The various txt and csv files are also resolution independent. Do you want to separate out the fields that depend on the land sea mask and so the ocean model resolution?
stash is logically part of the atmosphere (resolution independent again).
Do you want to separate out the fields that depend on the land sea mask and so the ocean model resolution?
Sounds like a good idea for clarity and to make it easier for those who want to alter the land/sea mask, and also avoid unnecessary duplication when creating a new configuration with a different resolution
stash is logically part of the atmosphere (resolution independent again).
I wasn't sure if STASHmaster
was reference data that was pretty much global for all configurations with a roughly similar UM version. Which I guess means it should be under atmosphere
as you suggest. Will change. I've not put resolution_independent
as it seems redundant, but we can for consistency/clarity.
Does spectral
make sense as a category? Couldn't think of a better name or another category to plonk it in.
Here is the updated organisation
.
├── /g/data/vk83/experiments/inputs/access-esm1p5/
├── ocean/
│ ├── biogeochemistry/
│ │ └── global.1deg/
│ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ ├── bgc_param.nc
│ │ ├── cfc_auscom.nc
│ │ ├── co2_obs.nc
│ │ ├── dust.nc
│ │ ├── ocmip2_abiotic_c14_atm_hist_om3_bc-1-9999.nc
│ │ ├── ocmip2_fice_monthly_om1p5_bc.nc
│ │ ├── ocmip2_press_monthly_om1p5_bc.nc
│ │ ├── ocmip2_siple_co2_atm_am2_bc-1-9999.nc
│ │ └── ocmip2_xkw_monthly_om1p5_bc.nc
│ ├── grids/
│ │ └── mosaic/
│ │ └── global.1deg/
│ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ └── grid_spec.nc
│ ├── shortwave_penetration/
│ │ └── global.1deg/
│ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ └── ssw_atten_depth.nc
│ └── tides/
│ └── global.1deg/
│ └── 2020.05.19/
│ ├── roughness_amp.nc
│ └── tideamp.nc
├── atmosphere/
│ ├── land/
│ │ ├── biogeochem/
│ │ │ ├── resolution_independent/
│ │ │ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ │ │ ├── modis_phenology_csiro.txt
│ │ │ │ └── pftlookup_csiro_v16_17tiles_wtlnds.csv
│ │ │ └── global.1deg/
│ │ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ │ └── Ndep_1850_ESM1.anc
│ │ ├── biogeophys/
│ │ │ └── resolution_independent/
│ │ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ │ ├── def_soil_params.txt
│ │ │ └── def_veg_params.txt
│ │ ├── soiltype/
│ │ │ └── global.1deg/
│ │ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ │ └── qrparm.soil_igbp_vg
│ │ └── vegetation/
│ │ └── global.1deg/
│ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ └── cable_vegfunc_N96.anc
│ ├── aerosol/
│ │ └── global.1deg/
│ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ ├── BC_hi_1850_ESM1.anc
│ │ ├── Bio_1850_ESM1.anc
│ │ ├── biogenic_351sm.N96L38
│ │ ├── scycl_1850_ESM1_v4.anc
│ │ ├── DMS_conc.N96
│ │ ├── sulpc_oxidants_N96_L38
│ │ └── OCFF_1850_ESM1.anc
│ ├── grids/
│ │ └── global.1deg/
│ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ ├── qrparm.mask
│ │ └── vertlevs_G3
│ ├── spectral/
│ │ └── global.1deg/
│ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ ├── spec3a_lw_hadgem1_6on
│ │ └── spec3a_sw_hadgem1_6on
│ ├── forcing/
│ │ ├── resolution_independent/
│ │ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ │ └── ozone_1850_ESM1.anc
│ │ └── global.1deg/
│ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ └── volcts_18502000ave.dat
│ └── stash/
│ └── 2020.05.19/
│ ├── stasets
│ └── STASHmaster
├── coupler/
│ ├── grids/
│ │ └── global.1deg/
│ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ ├── areas.nc
│ │ ├── grids.nc
│ │ └── masks.nc
│ └── remapping_weights/
│ └── global.1deg/
│ └── 2020.05.19 /
│ ├── rmp_cice_to_um1t_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc
│ ├── rmp_cice_to_um1u_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc
│ ├── rmp_cice_to_um1v_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc
│ ├── rmp_um1t_to_cice_CONSERV_DESTAREA.nc
│ ├── rmp_um1t_to_cice_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc
│ ├── rmp_um1u_to_cice_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc
│ └── rmp_um1v_to_cice_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc
├── ice/
│ └── grids/
│ └── global.1deg/
│ └── 2020.05.19/
│ ├── grid.nc
│ └── kmt.nc
└── /g/data/vk83/experiments/restarts/access-esm1p5/
├── atmosphere
├── coupler
└── ice
You should able to access and edit a copy of this using this link:
You can just cut n' paste this into https://tree.nathanfriend.io/
``` /g/data/vk83/experiments/inputs/access-esm1p5/ ocean biogeochemistry global.1deg 2020.05.19 bgc_param.nc cfc_auscom.nc co2_obs.nc dust.nc ocmip2_abiotic_c14_atm_hist_om3_bc-1-9999.nc ocmip2_fice_monthly_om1p5_bc.nc ocmip2_press_monthly_om1p5_bc.nc ocmip2_siple_co2_atm_am2_bc-1-9999.nc ocmip2_xkw_monthly_om1p5_bc.nc grids mosaic global.1deg 2020.05.19 grid_spec.nc shortwave_penetration global.1deg 2020.05.19 ssw_atten_depth.nc tides global.1deg 2020.05.19 roughness_amp.nc tideamp.nc atmosphere land biogeochem resolution_independent 2020.05.19 modis_phenology_csiro.txt pftlookup_csiro_v16_17tiles_wtlnds.csv global.1deg 2020.05.19 Ndep_1850_ESM1.anc biogeophys resolution_independent 2020.05.19 def_soil_params.txt def_veg_params.txt soiltype global.1deg 2020.05.19 qrparm.soil_igbp_vg vegetation global.1deg 2020.05.19 cable_vegfunc_N96.anc aerosol global.1deg 2020.05.19 BC_hi_1850_ESM1.anc Bio_1850_ESM1.anc biogenic_351sm.N96L38 scycl_1850_ESM1_v4.anc DMS_conc.N96 sulpc_oxidants_N96_L38 OCFF_1850_ESM1.anc grids global.1deg 2020.05.19 qrparm.mask vertlevs_G3 spectral global.1deg 2020.05.19 spec3a_lw_hadgem1_6on spec3a_sw_hadgem1_6on forcing resolution_independent 2020.05.19 ozone_1850_ESM1.anc global.1deg 2020.05.19 volcts_18502000ave.dat stash 2020.05.19 stasets STASHmaster coupler grids global.1deg 2020.05.19 areas.nc grids.nc masks.nc remapping_weights global.1deg 2020.05.19 rmp_cice_to_um1t_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc rmp_cice_to_um1u_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc rmp_cice_to_um1v_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc rmp_um1t_to_cice_CONSERV_DESTAREA.nc rmp_um1t_to_cice_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc rmp_um1u_to_cice_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc rmp_um1v_to_cice_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc ice grids global.1deg 2020.05.19 grid.nc kmt.nc /g/data/vk83/experiments/restarts/access-esm1p5/ atmosphere coupler ice ```
Hi Aidan and Martin, I just have a few questions about the proposed structure:
global.N96
for the atmosphere inputs rather than global.1deg
? Or instead, is the idea to highlight which files depend specifically on the ocean model's resolution?Relatedly, what would be sensible for categorising the coupling files which use all of the grids? Would it make sense to note down both resolutions here, e.g. A.global.N96_O.global.1deg
?
If we want to additionally separate out input files which depend on the land sea mask, would the idea be to add another level in the directory tree, e.g:
└── vegetation/
└── global.1deg/
├── lsm_dependent/
│ └── 2020.05.19/
│ └── cable_vegfunc_N96.anc
└── lsm_independent/
└── ...
Would highlighting the land-sea mask dependence in the directory tree be preferable to just noting it somewhere in the documentation?
Following on from 2, would our intention be to highlight the files which absolutely must be changed when the land sea mask changes (e.g. I'm guessing cable_vegfunc_N96.anc fits this category), or instead files which in theory should be changed alongside the land sea mask, but the model will still run even if they are unchanged. I wonder whether something like the DMS_conc.N96 would fall under this second category:
Let me know if I might have misunderstood/misinterpreted anything here.
- would we like to use
global.N96
for the atmosphere inputs rather thanglobal.1deg
?
Good point! This shows my ocean-bias, and yes I think it would be better to use something that makes sense from an atmosphere point of view.
Relatedly, what would be sensible for categorising the coupling files which use all of the grids? Would it make sense to note down both resolutions here, e.g.
A.global.N96_O.global.1deg
Again, a good suggestion. is global twice redundant? Wondering out loud if we'd ever have a remapping file from global
to regional
or vice-versa?
Would highlighting the land-sea mask dependence in the directory tree be preferable to just noting it somewhere in the documentation?
Very probably. I didn't know this was the case, which shows the value of highlighting it.
or instead files which in theory should be changed alongside the land sea mask, but the model will still run even if they are unchanged
Another excellent point. I'd say anything that should be changed should also be categorised as such.
I've put together a copy of the input directory with an updated structure, located currently in /g/data/tm70/sw6175/esm1p5-input-restructure/restructured-inputs/pre-industrial
.
The tree for this new directory is:
└── pre-industrial
├── atmosphere
│ ├── aerosol
│ │ └── global.N96
│ │ └── 2020.05.19
│ │ ├── BC_hi_1850_ESM1.anc
│ │ ├── Bio_1850_ESM1.anc
│ │ ├── biogenic_351sm.N96L38
│ │ ├── DMS_conc.N96
│ │ ├── OCFF_1850_ESM1.anc
│ │ ├── scycl_1850_ESM1_v4.anc
│ │ └── sulpc_oxidants_N96_L38
│ ├── forcing
│ │ ├── global.N96
│ │ │ └── 2020.05.19
│ │ │ └── ozone_1850_ESM1.anc
│ │ └── resolution_independent
│ │ └── 2020.05.19
│ │ └── volcts_18502000ave.dat
│ ├── grids
│ │ └── global.N96
│ │ └── 2020.05.19
│ │ ├── qrparm.mask
│ │ └── vertlevs_G3
│ ├── land
│ │ ├── biogeochem
│ │ │ ├── global.N96
│ │ │ │ └── 2020.05.19
│ │ │ │ └── Ndep_1850_ESM1.anc
│ │ │ └── resolution_independent
│ │ │ └── 2020.05.19
│ │ │ ├── modis_phenology_csiro.txt
│ │ │ ├── pftlookup_csiro_v16_17tiles.csv
│ │ │ ├── pftlookup_csiro_v16_17tiles_spinup.csv
│ │ │ ├── pftlookup_csiro_v16_17tiles_wtlnds.csv
│ │ │ └── poolcnpInTumbarumba.csv
│ │ ├── biogeophys
│ │ │ └── resolution_independent
│ │ │ └── 2020.05.19
│ │ │ ├── def_soil_params.txt
│ │ │ └── def_veg_params.txt
│ │ ├── soiltype
│ │ │ └── global.N96
│ │ │ └── 2020.05.19
│ │ │ └── qrparm.soil_igbp_vg
│ │ └── vegetation
│ │ └── global.N96
│ │ └── 2020.05.19
│ │ └── cable_vegfunc_N96.anc
│ ├── SOURCES
│ ├── spectral
│ │ └── resolution_independent
│ │ └── 2020.05.19
│ │ ├── spec3a_lw_hadgem1_6on
│ │ └── spec3a_sw_hadgem1_6on
│ └── stash
│ └── 2020.05.19
│ ├── stasets
│ └── STASHmaster
├── coupler
│ ├── cf_name_table.txt
│ ├── grids
│ │ └── global.o.1deg_a.N96
│ │ └── 2020.05.19
│ │ ├── areas.nc
│ │ ├── grids.nc
│ │ └── masks.nc
│ └── remapping_weights
│ └── global.o.1deg_a.N96
│ └── 2020.05.19
│ ├── rmp_cice_to_um1t_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc
│ ├── rmp_cice_to_um1u_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc
│ ├── rmp_cice_to_um1v_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc
│ ├── rmp_um1t_to_cice_CONSERV_DESTAREA.nc
│ ├── rmp_um1t_to_cice_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc
│ ├── rmp_um1u_to_cice_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc
│ └── rmp_um1v_to_cice_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc
├── ice
│ ├── grids
│ │ └── global.1deg
│ │ └── 2020.05.19
│ │ ├── grid.nc
│ │ └── kmt.nc
├── ocean
│ ├── basin_mask.nc
│ ├── biogeochemistry
│ │ └── global.1deg
│ │ └── 2020.05.19
│ │ ├── bgc_param.nc
│ │ ├── cfc_auscom.nc
│ │ ├── co2_obs.nc
│ │ ├── dust.nc
│ │ ├── ocmip2_abiotic_c14_atm_hist_om3_bc-1-9999.nc
│ │ ├── ocmip2_fice_monthly_om1p5_bc.nc
│ │ ├── ocmip2_press_monthly_om1p5_bc.nc
│ │ ├── ocmip2_siple_co2_atm_am2_bc-1-9999.nc
│ │ └── ocmip2_xkw_monthly_om1p5_bc.nc
│ ├── geothermal_heating.nc
│ ├── grids
│ │ └── mosaic
│ │ └── global.1deg
│ │ └── 2020.05.19
│ │ └── grid_spec.nc
│ ├── shortwave_penetration
│ │ └── global.1deg
│ │ └── 2020.05.19
│ │ └── ssw_atten_depth.nc
│ └── tides
│ └── global.1deg
│ └── 2020.05.19
│ ├── roughness_amp.nc
│ └── tideamp.nc
└── restart
├── atmosphere
├── coupler
├── ice
└── ocean
Comments
/g/data/access
directory, and listed the modification dates and paths of any identical files in the collapsed table below. The files likely go back much further than the listed dates, (e.g. tideamp.nc
matches /g/data/access/projects/access/data/ACCESS_CMIP5/mom4/tides_auscom_20080605.nc
which might date back to 2008). Martin noted that we're unlikely to find the original creation dates for most files, and that the 2020.05.19 date is reasonable for us to use here.Questions There are several things I'm unsure about:
SOURCES
file, listing where the atmospheric inputs had been copied from. Do we want to keep this somewhere, and perhaps update it to include the sources I found for the ocean and other data (some files I couldn't find anything for though), or just leave it out?/g/data/vk83/experiments/inputs/access-esm1p5/pre-industrial
directory, but were in the .../inputs/access-esm1p5/common/
(namely the ocean files basin_mask.nc
, geothermal_heating.nc
, grid_spec.nc
, roughness_amp.nc
, ssw_atten_depth.nc
, and tideamp.nc
). I've copied them from the common
directory – just wanted to confirm that these are the correct versions to use. basin_mask.nc
, geothermal_heating.nc
in the ocean
directory, and cf_nametable.txt
in the coupler
directory. @aidanheerdegen, do you know if the pre-industrial configuration needs these files? They are listed in the inputs.yaml
manifest file, but geothermal heating appears to be switched off in the ocean namelist. edit: Just saw this previous issue - if we're happy to remove these files I'll omit them from the new directory.grid_spec.nc
file under ocean/grids/mosaic/
correct? It matches the classification for the OM2 file of the same name, however the pre-industrial and om2 grid_spec.nc
files are quite different. I've included ncdumps of each in the dropdowns below. The pre-industrial file doesn't mention any mosaics, and so I'm unsure whether our classification is correct.pre-industrial/ocean/grids/mosaic/global.1deg/2020.05.19/grid_spec.nc
:
access-om2/ocean/grids/mosaic/global.1deg/2020.05.30/grid_spec.nc
:
I placed the atmosphere vertical levels file vertlevs_G3
in a global.N96
directory, as it's specifying information about the resolution. Since it's just a text file though, unsure whether it really is resolution dependent. @MartinDix would you be able to clarify the proper classification?
Is it reasonable to classify the resolutions for the coupling files as global.o.1deg_a.N96
? I noticed that most of the files mention the cice rather than the ocean model and so am wondering whether I'm incorrect to prioritise the ocean grid in the labelling?
Apologies for all the questions. Let me know if you have any suggestions or changes to make. Once everything is worked out, I'll make a branch of the configuration which uses the new structure.
The atmosphere directory originally contained a SOURCES file, listing where the atmospheric inputs had been copied from. Do we want to keep this somewhere, and perhaps update it to include the sources I found for the ocean and other data (some files I couldn't find anything for though), or just leave it out?
It is only the paths to the files, which might mean something to some people. Ideally we'd find out what that meaning might be as people don't last forever. That may be a later endeavour however, so I don't see any problem with keeping the file around, or putting the relevant path in a README in the sub-dir where the file is now located and note that this was the original location where the file was sourced from.
Just saw this previous issue - if we're happy to remove these files I'll omit them from the new directory.
Probably best to hash out in that issue what should be omitted and then action it here.
Is our categorisation of the ocean
grid_spec.nc
file underocean/grids/mosaic/
correct? It matches the classification for the OM2 file of the same name, however the pre-industrial and om2grid_spec.nc
files are quite different.
The ESM1.5 configuration is using the old FMS mosaic format. IIRC I converted the COSIMA 1 degree grid to the more modern format to match the 0.25 and 0.1 grids, but I can't find any mention of it. Damn.
Ideally we should switch to using the same grid format as the ACCESS-OM2 configurations, though I think the grid itself is different due to cell stretching around the equator in the coupled models, but correct me if I'm wrong.
@anton-seaice has been playing around with grids quite a bit, so he or @dougiesquire may be able to comment on this.
Is it reasonable to classify the resolutions for the coupling files as global.o.1deg_a.N96? I noticed that most of the files mention the cice rather than the ocean model and so am wondering whether I'm incorrect to prioritise the ocean grid in the labelling?
It's a good point. The ocean and ice share a grid, and the atmosphere sends all fields through the ice model IIRC. So yes it is a bit weird. Could use a name like global.oi.1deg_a.N96
. In any case does it make sense to single out a single model when the coupling is between two models, and is indicated in the names of the files themselves?
Ideally we should switch to using the same grid format as the ACCESS-OM2 configurations, though I think the grid itself is different due to cell stretching around the equator in the coupled models, but correct me if I'm wrong.
The ACCESS-OM 1 degree grid also have some (latitudinal?) refinement around the equator, its probably the same but it might not be. There is no guarantee the variable format used between the CICE4 in ESM1.5 and the AUSCOM-CICE5 fork are the same of course (again, quite likely there are).
or @dougiesquire may be able to comment on this.
Maybe not... I wasn't even aware that there was an "old FMS mosaic format".
My understanding of the "new" (ACCESS-OM2) format is:
grid_spec.nc
file has the locations of the mosaic files for the various components. For ACCESS-OM2 only the ocn_*
variables are used and the ocean mosaic file is ocean_mosaic.nc
.ocean_mosaic.nc
file has the location of the grid tile files that make up the mosaic and defines how they fit together. In ACCESS-OM2 there is only one grid tile (ocean_hgrid.nc
)ocean_hgrid.nc
file defines the gridIt looks like in the "old FMS mosaic format", all the info that could be spread across this nested structure is contained in the one grid_spec.nc
file? So the ocean grid is defined by the x_*
and y_*
variables in grid_spec.nc
? Is that correct @aidanheerdegen? If so, then it looks to me like the ocean grids could be the same between ACCESS-OM2 and ACCESS-ESM1.5, but I can confirm tomorrow.
Also, a couple of unsolicited comments on the above structure:
share
directory (e.g. instead of resolution_independent
)global.o.1deg_a.N96
hard to parse at a glance. I presume this is encoding "1 deg ocean, N96 atmosphere" and to me something like global.o_1deg.a_N96
is clearer. I might be alone in that.Please feel free to ignore both
It looks like in the "old FMS mosaic format", all the info that could be spread across this nested structure is contained in the one
grid_spec.nc
file? So the ocean grid is defined by thex_*
andy_*
variables ingrid_spec.nc
? Is that correct @aidanheerdegen?
IIRC yes. This is where we really miss the mentat abilities of Russ Fiedler when it comes to MOM5.
Many of these files are common across pre-industrial and historical. E.g. for the atmosphere everything except forcing and aerosol directories.
Everything in the coupler and ice directories is also common. Everything in ocean too, except perhaps biogeochemistry?
I've tried modifying the tree based on the above ideas.
- and to me something like
global.o_1deg.a_N96
is clearer. I agree, I think that looks better.
I've added in an unused
directory for the files discussed here – I'm thinking it might be good to hold onto them in case they are needed later, but let me know if it would be better to remove them.
Many of these files are common across pre-industrial and historical
I've added in a common directory and moved these files across. It looks like the pre-industrial and historical configurations use different Ndep
files under atmosphere/land/biogeochem/
(e.g. Ndep_1850_ESM1.anc
for pre-industrial and Ndep_1849_2015.anc
for historical), but otherwise the land inputs appear to be shared – just wanted to confirm that this sounds correct.
Everything in ocean too, except perhaps biogeochemistry?
From what I can tell, the copies of bgc_param.nc
, dust.nc
, and ocmip2_press_monthly_om1p5_bc.nc
accessed by the coe historical experiment are identical to the copies in /g/data/vk83/experiments/inputs/access-esm1p5/pre-industrial/ocean
, and so I've put them into the common directory. The other bgc inputs don't seem to be used , and so I've moved them into the unused section.
The modified tree based on the above is shown below. Let me know your thoughts/if you have any suggestions!
.
├── common/
│ ├── atmosphere/
│ │ ├── grids/
│ │ │ ├── global.N96/
│ │ │ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ │ │ └── qrparm.mask
│ │ │ └── resolution_independent/
│ │ │ └── vertlevs_G3
│ │ ├── land/
│ │ │ ├── biogeochem/
│ │ │ │ └── resolution_independent/
│ │ │ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ │ │ ├── modis_phenology_csiro.txt
│ │ │ │ └── pftlookup_csiro_v16_17tiles_wtlnds.csv
│ │ │ ├── biogeophys/
│ │ │ │ └── resolution_independent/
│ │ │ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ │ │ ├── def_soil_params.txt
│ │ │ │ └── def_veg_params.txt
│ │ │ ├── soiltype/
│ │ │ │ └── global.N96/
│ │ │ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ │ │ └── qrparm.soil_igbp_vg
│ │ │ └── vegetation/
│ │ │ └── global.N96/
│ │ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ │ └── cable_vegfunc_N96.anc
│ │ ├── stash/
│ │ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ │ ├── stasets
│ │ │ └── STASHmaster
│ │ └── spectral/
│ │ └── resolution_independent/
│ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ ├── spec3a_lw_hadgem1_6on
│ │ └── spec3a_sw_hadgem1_6on
│ ├── coupler/
│ │ ├── grids/
│ │ │ └── global.oi_1deg.a_N96/
│ │ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ │ ├── areas.nc
│ │ │ ├── grids.nc
│ │ │ └── masks.nc
│ │ └── remapping_weights/
│ │ └── global.oi_1deg.a_N96/
│ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ ├── rmp_cice_to_um1t_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc
│ │ ├── rmp_cice_to_um1u_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc
│ │ ├── rmp_cice_to_um1v_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc
│ │ ├── rmp_um1t_to_cice_CONSERV_DESTAREA.nc
│ │ ├── rmp_um1t_to_cice_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc
│ │ ├── rmp_um1u_to_cice_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc
│ │ └── rmp_um1v_to_cice_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc
│ ├── ice/
│ │ └── grids/
│ │ └── global.1deg/
│ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ ├── grid.nc
│ │ └── kmt.nc
│ └── ocean/
│ ├── biogeochemistry/
│ │ └── global.1deg/
│ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ ├── bgc_param.nc
│ │ ├── dust.nc
│ │ └── ocmip2_press_monthly_om1p5_bc.nc
│ └── grids/
│ ├── mosaic/
│ │ └── global.1deg/
│ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ └── grid_spec.nc
│ ├── shortwave_penetration/
│ │ └── global.1deg/
│ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ └── ssw_atten_depth.nc
│ └── tides/
│ └── global.1deg/
│ └── 2020.05.19/
│ ├── roughness_amp.nc
│ └── tideamp.nc
├── pre-industrial/
│ ├── atmosphere/
│ │ ├── aerosol/
│ │ │ └── global.N96/
│ │ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ │ ├── BC_hi_1850_ESM1.anc
│ │ │ ├── Bio_1850_ESM1.anc
│ │ │ ├── biogenic_351sm.N96L38
│ │ │ ├── DMS_conc.N96
│ │ │ ├── OCFF_1850_ESM1.anc
│ │ │ ├── scycl_1850_ESM1_v4.anc
│ │ │ └── sulpc_oxidants_N96_L38
│ │ ├── forcing/
│ │ │ ├── global.N96/
│ │ │ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ │ │ └── ozone_1850_ESM1.anc
│ │ │ └── resolution_independent/
│ │ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ │ └── volcts_18502000ave.dat
│ │ └── land/
│ │ └── biogeochem/
│ │ └── global.N96/
│ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ └── Ndep_1850_ESM1.anc
│ ├── ocean
│ └── restart/
│ ├── atmosphere
│ ├── coupler
│ ├── ice
│ └── ocean
└── unused/
├── atmosphere/
│ ├── climatology/
│ │ └── global.N96/
│ │ └── 2020.05.19/
│ │ ├── qrclim.slt
│ │ └── qrclim.smow
│ └── land/
│ └── biogeochem/
│ └── resolution_independent/
│ └── 2020.05.19/
│ ├── pftlookup_csiro_v16_17tiles.csv
│ ├── pftlookup_csiro_v16_17tiles_spinup.csv
│ └── poolcnpInTumbarumba.csv
├── coupler/
│ └── uncategorised/
│ └── 2020.05.19/
│ └── cf_name_table.txt
├── ice/
│ └── climatology/
│ └── global.1deg/
│ └── 2020.05.19/
│ └── monthly_sstsss.nc
└── ocean/
└── uncategorised/
├── global.1deg/
│ └── 2020.05.19/
│ ├── basin_mask.nc
│ └── geothermal_heating.nc
└── biogeochemistry/
└── global.1deg/
└── 2020.05.19/
├── cfc_auscom.nc
├── co2_obs.nc
├── ocmip2_abiotic_c14_atm_hist_om3_bc-1-9999.nc
├── ocmip2_fice_monthly_om1p5_bc.nc
├── ocmip2_siple_co2_atm_am2_bc-1-9999.nc
└── ocmip2_xkw_monthly_om1p5_bc.nc
Awesome, thanks @blimlim this looks great.
My only issue with common
is that I'm guessing this is only common to present-day, or close to it. What will this look like when we have paleoclimate configurations?
Maybe it isn't worth overthinking too much, but if there is anything obvious I'd be keen to incorporate it now. e.g. do we put this all under present
, and have a separate hierarchy for miocene
and last-glacial-maximum
?
(Note: we could use present-day
which is more obvious, but perhaps misleading because we're also talking about pre-industrial)
I like the idea of unused
. It makes is obvious it has been omitted.
That sounds like a good idea
(Note: we could use
present-day
which is more obvious, but perhaps misleading because we're also talking about pre-industrial)
would modern
be accurate for the pre-industrial, historical, and maybe also the CMIP scenario configurations?
If the tree is looking ok to everyone, I'll rearrange my copy of the input directory to match and test it out.
would
modern
be accurate for the pre-industrial, historical, and maybe also the CMIP scenario configurations?
Nice suggestion. Yep, sounds good.
If the tree is looking ok to everyone, I'll rearrange my copy of the input directory to match and test it out.
Sounds like a good idea.
Similarly with the ice monthly_sstsss.nc.
When I was digging into the CICE calendar I noticed that the CICE code is looking for this file:
#ifdef AusCOM
idate_save = idate !save for late re-set in case 'restart' is used for jobnum=1
if (runtype == 'initial') then
nrec = month - 1 !month is from calendar
if (nrec == 0) nrec = 12
call get_time0_sstsss(trim(inputdir)//'/monthly_sstsss.nc', nrec)
endif
!the read in sst/sss determines the initial ice state (in init_state)
Removing this file from the input directory leads to the PI configuration crashing, in iceout085
:
(calendar) idate = 1010101
(get_time0_sstsss) file doesnt exist: INPUT/monthly_sstsss.nc
(END)
@MartinDix is it worth digging more into why it's requiring this file? For now I'll leave it in the restructured directory.
I am moderately sure that file is just used to set the initial ice extent. i.e. where the SST is below -1.8C in that file, the model will initialise with sea-ice present. This only occurs during initial spin-up (when runtype = 'initial'
) and then for later runs (of the same experiment) runtype = 'continue'
so this file is not neaded anymore.
Ah ok thanks. Just to check, is this meant to be happening in the default PI configuration? If I try and remove the file the model doesn't run.
Ah ok thanks. Just to check, is this meant to be happening in the default PI configuration? If I try and remove the file the model doesn't run.
Its needed in in all configurations when a new experiment is started (i.e. when there isnt a ice restart file).. (The initial conditions for sea-ice in these circumstances are not very critical ... their impact on the overall simulation would resolve within a year to be consistent with the other model components. The ocean model would take much longer to stabilise/spin-up.
The restructured directory is temporarily located in /g/data/tm70/sw6175/esm1p5-input-restructure/restructured-inputs
with tree shown at the bottom.
There are still a couple things to clean up (e.g. updating the SOURCES
file), but let me know if you notice anything else to change.
The md5 hashes compared to the inputs in /g/data/access/payu/access-esm/input/pre-industrial/
changed for one file, pftlookup_csiro_v16_17tiles_wtlnds.csv
. The copy currently in /g/data/vk83
and /g/data/access/payu
are slightly different:
diff /g/data/access/payu/access-esm/input/pre-industrial/atmosphere/CABLE-AUX-1.4/core/biogeochem/pftlookup_csiro_v16_17tiles_wtlnds.csv /g/data/vk83/experiments/inputs/access-esm1p5/pre-industrial/atmosphere/CABLE-AUX-1.4/core/biogeochem/pftlookup_csiro_v16_17tiles_wtlnds.csv
15c15
< 12,0,newpft,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
---
> 12,0,not used,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
34c34
< 12,2,0.5,1.8,32.30769231,2,0.5,0.022,1.439682005,40,5,0.04,0.23,0.824,0.137,5,222.22,0.2,0.009919764,,
---
> 12,5.5,0.5,1.8,0,2,0.5,0,1,1,1,0.04,0.23,0.824,0.137,5,222.22,0.2,0.02,,
The one in vk83
is identical to the older one in/g/data/access/projects/access/data/ACCESS_CMIP5/CABLE-AUX-1.4/core/biogeochem/pftlookup_csiro_v16_17tiles_wtlnds.csv
, so it looks like the coe version must have changed at some point. Short simulations using each file look identical though, and so I'm guessing this data isn't used, as hinted above... If anyone with more knowledge about CABLE is able to confirm this, that would be great!
└── modern
├── historical
│ ├── atmosphere
│ ├── coupler
│ ├── ice
│ ├── ocean
│ └── restart
│ ├── atmosphere
│ ├── coupler
│ ├── ice
│ └── ocean
├── pre-industrial
│ ├── atmosphere
│ │ ├── aerosol
│ │ │ └── global.N96
│ │ │ └── 2020.05.19
│ │ │ ├── BC_hi_1850_ESM1.anc
│ │ │ ├── Bio_1850_ESM1.anc
│ │ │ ├── biogenic_351sm.N96L38
│ │ │ ├── DMS_conc.N96
│ │ │ ├── OCFF_1850_ESM1.anc
│ │ │ ├── scycl_1850_ESM1_v4.anc
│ │ │ └── sulpc_oxidants_N96_L38
│ │ ├── forcing
│ │ │ ├── global.N96
│ │ │ │ └── 2020.05.19
│ │ │ │ └── ozone_1850_ESM1.anc
│ │ │ └── resolution_independent
│ │ │ └── 2020.05.19
│ │ │ └── volcts_18502000ave.dat
│ │ ├── land
│ │ │ └── biogeochemistry
│ │ │ └── global.N96
│ │ │ └── 2020.05.19
│ │ │ └── Ndep_1850_ESM1.anc
│ │ └── SOURCES
│ ├── coupler
│ ├── ice
│ ├── ocean
│ └── restart
│ ├── atmosphere
│ ├── coupler
│ ├── ice
│ └── ocean
├── shared-modern
│ ├── atmosphere
│ │ ├── grids
│ │ │ ├── global.N96
│ │ │ │ └── 2020.05.19
│ │ │ │ └── qrparm.mask
│ │ │ └── resolution_independent
│ │ │ └── 2020.05.19
│ │ │ └── vertlevs_G3
│ │ ├── land
│ │ │ ├── biogeochemistry
│ │ │ │ └── resolution_independent
│ │ │ │ └── 2020.05.19
│ │ │ │ ├── modis_phenology_csiro.txt
│ │ │ │ └── pftlookup_csiro_v16_17tiles_wtlnds.csv
│ │ │ ├── biogeophysics
│ │ │ │ └── resolution_independent
│ │ │ │ └── 2020.05.19
│ │ │ │ ├── def_soil_params.txt
│ │ │ │ └── def_veg_params.txt
│ │ │ ├── soiltype
│ │ │ │ └── global.N96
│ │ │ │ └── 2020.05.19
│ │ │ │ └── qrparm.soil_igbp_vg
│ │ │ └── vegetation
│ │ │ └── global.N96
│ │ │ └── 2020.05.19
│ │ │ └── cable_vegfunc_N96.anc
│ │ ├── spectral
│ │ │ └── resolution_independent
│ │ │ └── 2020.05.19
│ │ │ ├── spec3a_lw_hadgem1_6on
│ │ │ └── spec3a_sw_hadgem1_6on
│ │ └── stash
│ │ └── 2020.05.19
│ │ ├── stasets
│ │ └── STASHmaster
│ ├── coupler
│ │ ├── grids
│ │ │ └── global.oi_1deg.a_N96
│ │ │ └── 2020.05.19
│ │ │ ├── areas.nc
│ │ │ ├── grids.nc
│ │ │ └── masks.nc
│ │ └── remapping_weights
│ │ └── global.oi_1deg.a_N96
│ │ └── 2020.05.19
│ │ ├── rmp_cice_to_um1t_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc
│ │ ├── rmp_cice_to_um1u_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc
│ │ ├── rmp_cice_to_um1v_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc
│ │ ├── rmp_um1t_to_cice_CONSERV_DESTAREA.nc
│ │ ├── rmp_um1t_to_cice_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc
│ │ ├── rmp_um1u_to_cice_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc
│ │ └── rmp_um1v_to_cice_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc
│ ├── ice
│ │ ├── climatology
│ │ │ └── global.1deg
│ │ │ └── 2020.05.19
│ │ │ └── monthly_sstsss.nc
│ │ └── grids
│ │ └── global.1deg
│ │ └── 2020.05.19
│ │ ├── grid.nc
│ │ └── kmt.nc
│ └── ocean
│ ├── biogeochemistry
│ │ └── global.1deg
│ │ └── 2020.05.19
│ │ ├── bgc_param.nc
│ │ ├── dust.nc
│ │ └── ocmip2_press_monthly_om1p5_bc.nc
│ ├── grids
│ │ └── mosaic
│ │ └── global.1deg
│ │ └── 2020.05.19
│ │ └── grid_spec.nc
│ ├── shortwave_penetration
│ │ └── global.1deg
│ │ └── 2020.05.19
│ │ └── ssw_atten_depth.nc
│ └── tides
│ └── global.1deg
│ └── 2020.05.19
│ ├── roughness_amp.nc
│ └── tideamp.nc
└── unused
├── atmosphere
│ ├── climatology
│ │ └── global.N96
│ │ └── 2020.05.19
│ │ ├── qrclim.slt
│ │ └── qrclim.smow
│ └── land
│ └── biogeochemistry
│ └── resolution_independent
│ └── 2020.05.19
│ ├── pftlookup_csiro_v16_17tiles.csv
│ ├── pftlookup_csiro_v16_17tiles_spinup.csv
│ └── poolcnpInTumbarumba.csv
├── coupler
│ └── uncategorised
│ └── 2020.05.19
│ └── cf_name_table.txt
├── ice
└── ocean
├── biogeochemistry
│ └── global.1deg
│ └── 2020.05.19
│ ├── cfc_auscom.nc
│ ├── co2_obs.nc
│ ├── ocmip2_abiotic_c14_atm_hist_om3_bc-1-9999.nc
│ ├── ocmip2_fice_monthly_om1p5_bc.nc
│ ├── ocmip2_siple_co2_atm_am2_bc-1-9999.nc
│ └── ocmip2_xkw_monthly_om1p5_bc.nc
└── uncategorised
└── global.1deg
└── 2020.05.19
├── basin_mask.nc
└── geothermal_heating.nc
The one in vk83 is identical to the older one in /g/data/access/projects/access/data/ACCESS_CMIP5/CABLE-AUX-1.4/core/biogeochem/pftlookup_csiro_v16_17tiles_wtlnds.csv, so it looks like the coe version must have changed at some point. Short simulations using each file look identical though, and so I'm guessing this data isn't used, as hinted above... If anyone with more knowledge about CABLE is able to confirm this, that would be great!
@ccarouge ?
@blimlim Can you define short simulations? CASA only runs daily. Only the pftlookup file that is listed in the cable.nml will be used in the simulation anyway.
Ah good point! The above simulations were 2 months long, and the figure shows the difference in the second month's mean surface temperatures. The pftlookup_csiro_v16_17tiles_wtlnds.csv
is the one currently listed in the pre-industrial cable.nml
file, and so it would be good to know whether the differences between the coe version and vk83
versions are important.
@blimlim the differences seem to indicate the wtlnds
version is using a normally empty PFT index to carry a PFT that describes wetlands (land folks seem to have an aversion to vowels). It is definitely significant. There is an ancillary that contains a map of PFTs for the globe (no idea of the name of that file for ESM1.5). If that file contains points with values of 12, then the values for the wetlands are used and picking up the correct values would definitely make a big difference over wetlands.
@MartinDix just checking whether DMS_conc.N96
, biogenic_351sm.N96L38
, and sulpc_oxidants_N96_L38
should be moved out of pre-industrial/atmosphere
and into shared-modern/atmosphere
? It looks like the historical configuration is pointed to them too, e.g. ihist
for the historical configuration contains:
DMSCONC = 'DMSCONC : $ANCIL_ATMOS/DMS_conc.N96 ',
ARCLBIOG = 'ARCLBIOG : $ANCIL_ATMOS/biogenic_351sm.N96L38 ',
CHEMOXID = 'CHEMOXID : $ANCIL_ATMOS/sulpc_oxidants_N96_L38 ',
The ACCESS-ESM1.5 input directories inherit a structure from the COECMS experiments
Details
``` $ tree -L 3 /g/data/vk83/experiments/inputs/access-esm1p5/ /g/data/vk83/experiments/inputs/access-esm1p5/ ├── common │ └── ocean │ ├── basin_mask.nc │ ├── geothermal_heating.nc │ ├── grid_spec.nc │ ├── roughness_amp.nc │ ├── ssw_atten_depth.nc │ └── tideamp.nc └── pre-industrial ├── atmosphere │ ├── BC_hi_1850_ESM1.anc │ ├── Bio_1850_ESM1.anc │ ├── biogenic_351sm.N96L38 │ ├── CABLE-AUX-1.4 │ ├── cable_vegfunc_N96.anc │ ├── DMS_conc.N96 │ ├── Ndep_1850_ESM1.anc │ ├── OCFF_1850_ESM1.anc │ ├── ozone_1850_ESM1.anc │ ├── qrclim.slt │ ├── qrclim.smow │ ├── qrparm.mask │ ├── qrparm.soil_igbp_vg │ ├── scycl_1850_ESM1_v4.anc │ ├── SOURCES │ ├── spec3a_lw_hadgem1_6on │ ├── spec3a_sw_hadgem1_6on │ ├── stasets │ ├── STASHmaster │ ├── sulpc_oxidants_N96_L38 │ ├── vertlevs_G3 │ └── volcts_18502000ave.dat ├── coupler │ ├── areas.nc │ ├── cf_name_table.txt │ ├── grids.nc │ ├── masks.nc │ ├── rmp_cice_to_um1t_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc │ ├── rmp_cice_to_um1u_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc │ ├── rmp_cice_to_um1v_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc │ ├── rmp_um1t_to_cice_CONSERV_DESTAREA.nc │ ├── rmp_um1t_to_cice_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc │ ├── rmp_um1u_to_cice_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc │ └── rmp_um1v_to_cice_CONSERV_FRACNNEI.nc ├── ice │ ├── grid.nc │ ├── kmt.nc │ └── monthly_sstsss.nc ├── ocean │ ├── bgc_param.nc │ ├── cfc_auscom.nc │ ├── co2_obs.nc │ ├── dust.nc │ ├── ocmip2_abiotic_c14_atm_hist_om3_bc-1-9999.nc │ ├── ocmip2_fice_monthly_om1p5_bc.nc │ ├── ocmip2_press_monthly_om1p5_bc.nc │ ├── ocmip2_siple_co2_atm_am2_bc-1-9999.nc │ └── ocmip2_xkw_monthly_om1p5_bc.nc └── restart ├── atmosphere ├── coupler ├── ice └── ocean 15 directories, 48 files ````
They need to be rearranged to permit versioning and organised by function.
For example, the ACCESS-OM2 configurations have a top level that separates by function
and within each functional grouping it is split by extent and resolution, and then further by versions