Prioritized list of ocean test cases to port from compass

[cbegeman]

This is a list of test cases which may be ported from compass to polaris. Their priority listed below will be continually updated based on feedback and ocean model testing needs.

A checked box below means the test case has already been ported. Strike-through means we don't plan to port them.

In general, we will be porting all tests in a test group/category, as denoted by *

High priority:

Test cases in the nightly compass suite

• baroclinic_channel/*
• global_ocean/QU240/* @xylar
• global_ocean/QUwISC240/* @xylar
• ice_shelf_2d/* @cbegeman
• ziso/* @sbrus89

Test cases for MPAS-O testing or mesh generation

• single_column
• global_ocean/* (remaining cases not listed above for supported meshes) @xylar
• isomip_plus @xylar
• internal_wave @cbegeman
• drying_slope @cbegeman
• dam_break @cbegeman
• parabolic_bowl @sbrus89
• merry_go_round @andrewdnolan

Test cases needed for OMEGAv0

• global_convergence/*
• sphere_transport @cbegeman

Medium priority:

• overflow @cbegeman
• soma @sbrus89

Low priority:

• tendency_verification/all/Redi
• lock_exchange
• nonhydro/stratified_seiche
• nonhydro/internal_wave
• tides
• hurricane
• sea_mount @mark-petersen
• surface_waves
• gotm

[cbegeman]

@xylar Before I ping other folks, do you want to take a look at this and see what you think? I based my prioritization on https://acme-climate.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/OO/pages/3669491841/Task+Table+Testing+and+validation.

[sbrus89]

@cbegeman, I'd be happy to help with this and/or #115.

[cbegeman]

Thanks, @sbrus89! Let us know if you have input on the priority order, in particular for the tests you contributed like tides and hurricane.

[sbrus89]

I agree that tides and hurricane are both low-priority ports at this point.

[xylar]

@cbegeman, this list looks great! Feel free to ask for feedback from others.

[cbegeman]

@mark-petersen @sbrus89 @vanroekel It would be great to get your feedback on test prioritization for MPAS-O and Omega. Feel free to ping others who might have thoughts as well.

[vanroekel]

The priority list (of the tests I’m familiar with) look great to me. Could someone point me to the results of tendency verification? Or the part of the code where that is? I’d like to see before commenting on its usefulness and priority.

[xylar]

@vanroekel, the Redi tendency verification test was part of legacy COMPASS and was never ported to the new Compass package. Here's the legacy code:
https://github.com/MPAS-Dev/compass/tree/legacy/ocean/tendency_verification/all/Redi

[vanroekel]

Thanks @xylar having looked at that code, I would suggest moving it to low or medium priority. While it is an important validation step, it is by no means sufficient to fully debug / test redi. From what I have seen in @dengwirda's work and in my experience the parabolic bowl test is far more effective in debugging/testing Redi. My personal feeling is we don't need that test until Redi gets implemented in Omega

[cbegeman]

@vanroekel Thanks for taking a look. If it's not useful for MPAS-Ocean's testing (since global_ocean cases will show non-BFB results if we accidentally break Redi), that would make it low priority on this list (not needed this FY).

[mark-petersen]

I agree. This list looks good to me, thanks.

[cbegeman]

@lconlon @scalandr @katsmith133 and @alicebarthel Your feedback is also welcome!

[xylar]

@cbegeman and others, I think we can also start putting our names next to tasks we plan to port. More than one person's name can be next to a set of tasks, since there may be a lot of work involved (e.g. isomip_plus). Please add yourselves where you think you fit in!