Open JohnHalleyGotway opened 1 month ago
Just an additional bit of context regarding this change. It could be asked as to why couldn't you have 2 GROUP_MAP keys, one just containing AUTO and one just MANU and then run your job from that. That was one option which was looked at. There was one issue with that approach. It was noted that as we use a time window for which observations to use, there were occasional times where within the window, there were 2 obs for a location, one which came from AUTO and the other from MANU. We only want one of these to be stored (the one nearest), and with the 2 group approach you would get the nearest for MANU and also the nearest for AUTO (which is not the desired outcome).
Describe the Enhancement
This issue arose via dtcenter/METplus#2476 discussion from @robdarvell.
The
OBTYPE
stat header column is populated based on the message type specified in the Point-Stat and Ensemble-Stat configuration files. The sameOBTYPE
string is written for all STAT output line types generated by each verification task, including the matched pair (MPR
) and observation rank (ORANK
) line types.However, the
message_type_group_map
configuration option enables multiple input message types to be grouped together into the same verification task. In Rob's example he's grouping bothAUTO
andMANU
message types together into a group namedSURF
. Rather than settingOBTYPE
toSURF
in output MPR lines, he'd prefer to write the input obtype name instead.This task is to enhance the Point-Stat and Ensemble-Stat tools where the
message_type_group_map
is involved in the setting of theOBTYPE
output column. Provide the option of writingOBTYPE
for theMPR
andORANK
lines using the original input message type rather than the mapped name of the group.Recommend adding this logic through a configurable option rather than making a wholesale change:
set_hdr_obtype_as_group_key = TRUE
(or something simliar) WhereTRUE
maintains the current behavior of writingSURF
, andFALSE
would write the original observation message types ofAUTO
ofMANU
instead.This would support the MetOffice usage without changing the output for others.
Time Estimate
2 days?
Sub-Issues
Consider breaking the enhancement down into sub-issues. None needed.
Relevant Deadlines
List relevant project deadlines here or state NONE.
Funding Source
Define the source of funding and account keys here or state NONE.
Define the Metadata
Assignee
Labels
Milestone and Projects
Define Related Issue(s)
Consider the impact to the other METplus components.
Enhancement Checklist
See the METplus Workflow for details.
feature_<Issue Number>_<Description>
feature <Issue Number> <Description>