search

compdyn / partmc

Particle-resolved stochastic atmospheric aerosol model
http://lagrange.mechse.illinois.edu/partmc/
GNU General Public License v2.0
28 stars 16 forks source link

Clean up scenarios/ #58

Closed mwest1066 closed 7 years ago

mwest1066 commented 7 years ago

I suggest that in future we should officially release and support everything in the scenarios/ directory. To make this possible, we should delete old scenarios that either don't work or that we don't want anymore. My guideline is that each scenario should demonstrate some significant capability and/or should be associated with a paper. We shouldn't have scenarios for every minor feature because we can just refer to test/ files for these (e.g. nucleation).

My suggestion is:

1_urban_plume          - keep, Riemer (2009)
2_urban_plume2         - keep, Zaveri (2010)
3_condense             - keep and rename to "condense_templated", example of templating, Ching (2012)
4_nucleate             - delete
5_weighted             - delete
6_urban_plume_parallel - delete
7_dust                 - delete
8_chamber              - keep, barrel paper
mwest1066 commented 7 years ago

We should also add README files to all scenarios that we keep, giving a basic description and pointing to the associated paper.

jcurtis2 commented 7 years ago

Agreed - I was thinking this last night when I noticed that there was an 8_chamber and I personally had a 8_deposition (for that paper) on my local machine. Cutting it down to fewer will also hopefully help us support them and not miss fixing spec files for missing arguments or have broken processing/plotting.

Even with this idea, I don't think think we need to add back the dry deposition scenario. I don't think its necessary to isolate that single process with a scenario (and the test directory is really sufficient enough for one to set up the scenario in the paper).

mwest1066 commented 7 years ago

Sounds good.

@nriemer: any thoughts?