Skip to content

New CN matrix fails with single point sites with the new ctsm5.3 datasets. #2780

Description

@ekluzek

Since ctsm5.2.dev175 to ctsm5.3.0 we've been running tests with MIMICS with above ground CN matrtix that have been passing. The test is SMS_D.1x1_brazil.I1850Clm60BgcCrop.derecho_gnu.clm-mimics_matrixcn. This has the soil CN matrix off (because MIMICS is non-linear), but above ground CN matrix on (use_soil_matrixcn = .false. use_matrixcn = .true.).

There are two reasons for doing this test:

  1. Hopefully get MIMICS to spinup faster with above ground matrix on
  2. More extensive testing of Matrix for an edge case where it might fail easier

The hope for "1" was especially there as we weren't finding methods to speed up the spinup of MIMICS. The test did pass for 30 tags, and just started failing in ctsm5.3.0 with the following type of error in the log files:

lnd.log:

 hist_htapes_wrapup : Closing local history file ./SMS_D.1x1_brazil.I1850Clm60BgcCrop.derecho_gnu.clm-mimics_matrixcn.20240923_125029_ialh14.clm2.h1.0001-01-01-28800.nc at nstep =           16

(shr_strdata_readstrm) reading file ub: /glade/campaign/cesm/cesmdata/inputdata/atm/datm7/NASA_LIS/clmforc.Li_2016_climo1995-2013.360x720.lnfm_Total_c160825.nc       7
 ERROR: ERROR in /glade/work/erik/ctsm_worktrees/answer_changes/src/utils/SparseMatrixMultiplyMod.F90 at line 1246

cesm.log:

dec0996.hsn.de.hpc.ucar.edu 0:  ERROR: ERROR in /glade/work/erik/ctsm_worktrees/answer_changes/src/utils/SparseMatrixMultiplyMod.F90 at line 1246
dec0996.hsn.de.hpc.ucar.edu 0: #0  0x12c3b50 in __shr_abort_mod_MOD_shr_abort_backtrace
dec0996.hsn.de.hpc.ucar.edu 0: 	at /glade/work/erik/ctsm_worktrees/answer_changes/share/src/shr_abort_mod.F90:104
dec0996.hsn.de.hpc.ucar.edu 0: #1  0x12c3c13 in __shr_abort_mod_MOD_shr_abort_abort
dec0996.hsn.de.hpc.ucar.edu 0: 	at /glade/work/erik/ctsm_worktrees/answer_changes/share/src/shr_abort_mod.F90:61
dec0996.hsn.de.hpc.ucar.edu 0: #2  0x131f9c8 in __shr_assert_mod_MOD_shr_assert
dec0996.hsn.de.hpc.ucar.edu 0: 	at /glade/work/erik/ctsm_worktrees/answer_changes/share/src/shr_assert_mod.F90.in:95
dec0996.hsn.de.hpc.ucar.edu 0: #3  0xe38814 in __sparsematrixmultiplymod_MOD_spmp_abc
dec0996.hsn.de.hpc.ucar.edu 0: 	at /glade/work/erik/ctsm_worktrees/answer_changes/src/utils/SparseMatrixMultiplyMod.F90:1246
dec0996.hsn.de.hpc.ucar.edu 0: #4  0x8e97db in __cnvegmatrixmod_MOD_cnvegmatrix
dec0996.hsn.de.hpc.ucar.edu 0: 	at /glade/work/erik/ctsm_worktrees/answer_changes/src/biogeochem/CNVegMatrixMod.F90:1509
dec0996.hsn.de.hpc.ucar.edu 0: #5  0x10466ef in __cndrivermod_MOD_cndriverleaching
dec0996.hsn.de.hpc.ucar.edu 0: 	at /glade/work/erik/ctsm_worktrees/answer_changes/src/biogeochem/CNDriverMod.F90:1098
dec0996.hsn.de.hpc.ucar.edu 0: #6  0x92a6b2 in __cnvegetationfacade_MOD_ecosystemdynamicspostdrainage
dec0996.hsn.de.hpc.ucar.edu 0: 	at /glade/work/erik/ctsm_worktrees/answer_changes/src/biogeochem/CNVegetationFacade.F90:1125
dec0996.hsn.de.hpc.ucar.edu 0: #7  0x5d7ed6 in __clm_driver_MOD_clm_drv
dec0996.hsn.de.hpc.ucar.edu 0: 	at /glade/work/erik/ctsm_worktrees/answer_changes/src/main/clm_driver.F90:1119

The line it fails on from above is the SHR_ASSERT_FL in this section of code in SparseMatrixMultiplyMod.F90:

    if(present(num_actunit_C))then
       if(num_actunit_C < 0)then
          write(iulog,*) "error: num_actunit_C cannot be less than 0"
          call endrun( subname//" ERROR: bad value for num_actunit_C" )
          return
       end if
       if(.not. present(filter_actunit_C))then
          write(iulog,*) "error: num_actunit_C is presented but filter_actunit_C is missing"
          call endrun( subname//" ERROR: missing required optional arguments" )
          return
       end if
       SHR_ASSERT_FL((size(filter_actunit_C) > num_actunit_C), sourcefile, __LINE__)
    end if

The call in CNVegMatrixMod.F90 is here:

         if(num_actfirep .eq. 0 .and. nthreads < 2)then
            call AKallvegc%SPMP_AB(num_soilp,filter_soilp,AKphvegc,AKgmvegc,list_ready_phgmc,list_A=list_phc_phgm,list_B=list_gmc_phgm,&
                 NE_AB=NE_AKallvegc,RI_AB=RI_AKallvegc,CI_AB=CI_AKallvegc)
         else
            call AKallvegc%SPMP_ABC(num_soilp,filter_soilp,AKphvegc,AKgmvegc,AKfivegc,list_ready_phgmfic,list_A=list_phc_phgmfi,&
                 list_B=list_gmc_phgmfi,list_C=list_fic_phgmfi,NE_ABC=NE_AKallvegc,RI_ABC=RI_AKallvegc,CI_ABC=CI_AKallvegc,&
                 use_actunit_list_C=.True.,num_actunit_C=num_actfirep,filter_actunit_C=filter_actfirep)
         end if

Definition of done:

  • FAIL: Test if works for cold start
  • NO: Assess if should add a short f10 test and make sure it works
  • Change accordingly to what is found out from above

Activity

  1. added
    closed: wontfixWe won't fix this issue, because it would be too difficult and/or isn't important enough to fix
    priority: lowBackground task that doesn't need to be done right away.
    bugsomething is working incorrectly
    scienceEnhancement to or bug impacting science
    on Sep 23, 2024
  2. ekluzek commented on Sep 23, 2024

    @ekluzek
    ContributorAuthor

    This is the only test we have for mimics_matrixcn. It's also possible that the tests that passed would fail if run out far enough.

  3. ekluzek commented on Sep 23, 2024

    @ekluzek
    ContributorAuthor

    Here's the note about this test when it was added.

    #640 (comment)

    I'm also doing some longer and different tests in ctsm5.2.028 to see the test just happened to pass since it was too short. As well as making sure the same test works without MIMCS.

  4. ekluzek commented on Sep 23, 2024

    @ekluzek
    ContributorAuthor

    Longer tests and tests at f10 in ctsm5.2.028 seem to be fine.

    SMS_D.1x1_brazil.I1850Clm60BgcCrop.derecho_intel.clm-mimics_matrixcn
    SMS_D.f10_f10_mg37.I1850Clm60BgcCrop.derecho_intel.clm-mimics_matrixcn
    SMS_D_Lm1.1x1_brazil.I1850Clm60BgcCrop.derecho_gnu.clm-mimics_matrixcn
    SMS_Ly2.1x1_brazil.I1850Clm60BgcCrop.derecho_gnu.clm-mimics_matrixcn

    So maybe there is something specific about this with ctsm5.3.0 datasets.

    We'll mark this as an expected fail for now though.

  5. ekluzek commented on Sep 24, 2024

    @ekluzek
    ContributorAuthor

    The other test that fails in the same way is:

    SMS_Ld10_D_Mmpi-serial.CLM_USRDAT.I1PtClm60Bgc.derecho_gnu.clm-default--clm-NEON-HARV--clm-matrixcnOn

  6. slevis-lmwg commented on Sep 25, 2024

    @slevis-lmwg
    Contributor

    ...and SMS_Ld10_D_Mmpi-serial.CLM_USRDAT.I1PtClm60Bgc.izumi_nag.clm-default--clm-NEON-HARV--clm-matrixcnOn

  7. changed the title [-]Limitation: MIMICS with above ground CN matrix[/-] [+]New CN matrix fails with single point sites with the new ctsm5.3 datasets.[/+] on Sep 25, 2024
  8. added
    nextthis should get some attention in the next week or two. Normally each Thursday SE meeting.
    and removed
    priority: lowBackground task that doesn't need to be done right away.
    on Sep 25, 2024
  9. slevis-lmwg commented on Sep 25, 2024

    @slevis-lmwg
    Contributor

    My gut feeling is that these tests need new finidat files, based on past experiences where CNmatrix has crashed with one finidat and not with another (#2592).

    E.g. the nearest neighbor from the finidat may not contain the right pft combinations needed for these single-point simulations.

  10. slevis-lmwg commented on Sep 26, 2024

    @slevis-lmwg
    Contributor

    In one of the failing tests, I changed finidat from
    ctsm52026_f09_pSASU.clm2.r.0421-01-01-00000.nc
    to
    clmi.f19_interp_from.I1850Clm50BgcCrop-ciso.1366-01-01.0.9x1.25_gx1v7_simyr1850_c240223.nc
    and the test failed in a different timestep.

    Next I want to try setting finidat to the interpolated file saved in
    .../tests_0923-141750de/SMS_Ld10_D_Mmpi-serial.CLM_USRDAT.I1PtClm60Bgc.derecho_gnu.clm-default--clm-NEON-HARV--clm-matrixcnOn.GC.0923-141750de_gnu/run/init_generated_files/
    Hmm, but that may do nothing to help. I may need to generate a new finidat for this point starting from a cold start simulation.

  11. added this to the cesm3_0_beta04 milestone on Sep 26, 2024
  12. 14 remaining items

  13. slevis-lmwg commented on Oct 15, 2024

    @slevis-lmwg
    Contributor

    Trying a Clm6 version and Clm6 DEBUG version of the first in the above list of already passing tests:

    PASS ERS_Ld5_Mmpi-serial.1x1_numaIA.I2000Clm60BgcCrop.derecho_intel.clm-ciso_monthly_matrixcn_spinup
    PASS ERS_D_Ld5_Mmpi-serial.1x1_numaIA.I2000Clm60BgcCrop.derecho_intel.clm-ciso_monthly_matrixcn_spinup
    

    and non-DEBUG versions of the failing tests:

    PASS SMS_Ld10_Mmpi-serial.CLM_USRDAT.I1PtClm60Bgc.derecho_gnu.clm-default--clm-NEON-HARV--clm-matrixcnOn
    PASS SMS.1x1_brazil.I1850Clm60BgcCrop.derecho_gnu.clm-mimics_matrixcn
    

    So DEBUG must be uncovering a problem in these two. I will think about what I want to try next...

  14. slevis-lmwg commented on Oct 16, 2024

    @slevis-lmwg
    Contributor

    I added diagnostic write-statements just before the error gets triggered in SparseMatrixMultiplyMod.F90 line 1246:
    SHR_ASSERT_FL((size(filter_actunit_C) > num_actunit_C), sourcefile, __LINE__)
    and both failing tests fail when they encounter
    size(filter_actunit_C) = num_actunit_C
    This seems like a non-dealbreaker to me, so I changed the ASSERT to ">="
    The equality gets the currently failing tests to pass without triggering other problems.

  15. slevis-lmwg commented on Oct 16, 2024

    @slevis-lmwg
    Contributor

    @ekluzek I will run this by you before I open a PR with this code change.

    My branch is in this directory:
    /glade/work/slevis/git/LMWG_dev8
    and open the PR with
    git push -u slevis-lmwg fix_1x1_matrix_fails

  16. moved this from Todo to In Progress in LMWG: Sprint Planning Boardon Oct 16, 2024
  17. moved this from In Progress to Stalled in LMWG: Sprint Planning Boardon Oct 16, 2024
  18. ekluzek commented on Oct 18, 2024

    @ekluzek
    ContributorAuthor

    @slevis-lmwg that's correct the inequality should be >= rather than just >. One point there is to just make sure the array size isn't too small. The array must've been larger all the time previously. I'd have to think about why that's the case...

    I'm glad you were able to figure that out.

  19. moved this from Stalled to In Progress in LMWG: Sprint Planning Boardon Oct 18, 2024
  20. added a commit that references this issue on Oct 23, 2024
  21. moved this from In Progress to Done in LMWG: Sprint Planning Boardon Oct 23, 2024
  22. added
    doneIssues whose closing PR is done but not yet merged (pending test re-run ok)
    on Oct 24, 2024
  23. glemieux commented on Jan 27, 2025

    @glemieux
    Contributor

    @slevis-lmwg is this still a live issue, or was it addressed by #2840?

  24. slevis-lmwg commented on Jan 27, 2025

    @slevis-lmwg
    Contributor

    #2840 resolved it. I merged that to https://github.com/ESCOMP/CTSM/tree/cesm3_0_beta04_changes

    The issue probably remains open because https://github.com/ESCOMP/CTSM/tree/cesm3_0_beta04_changes has not been merged to master.

  25. glemieux commented on Jan 27, 2025

    @glemieux
    Contributor

    Gotcha, thanks for the clarification

  26. added theissue type on Mar 28, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

bugsomething is working incorrectlydoneIssues whose closing PR is done but not yet merged (pending test re-run ok)priority: lowBackground task that doesn't need to be done right away.scienceEnhancement to or bug impacting science

Type

Projects

Relationships

None yet

Development

No branches or pull requests

Issue actions