Open xjules opened 2 months ago
Currently design2params will fail if you run more realizations than entries in design matrix. Maybe we should do the same, just ignore NUM_REALIZATIONS
if you choose design matrix and use number of realizations specified in the design matrix.
For instance if you only specify realization 1,4,7 in the design matrix, than it is probably expected that only realizations 1,4,7 are actually run?
Currently design2params will fail if you run more realizations than entries in design matrix. Maybe we should do the same, just ignore
NUM_REALIZATIONS
if you choose design matrix and use number of realizations specified in the design matrix. For instance if you only specify realization 1,4,7 in the design matrix, than it is probably expected that only realizations 1,4,7 are actually run?
This makes sense for ensemble_experiment
, but not sure if we are to use DESIGN_MATRIX
in the update step. Let's focus only for the ensemble experiment for now. If we would choose a subset (active realizations) from the list of realizations in the design matrix, why would this not work?
Some of the points of this issue has been covered but are still a lot of validation issues, some of them are:
The validation should include checking whether the design sheet part handles
NUM_REALIZATIONS
correctly, which means whether the all the design values combined with default sheet will handle the total number of realizations.REAL
column (if provided) should contain iens; which yield active realizations and thus filling the active realizations edit box.Blocked by: https://github.com/equinor/ert/issues/8902