ACCESS-OM3 model evaluation team minutes

2026-06-25 Notes/minutes

ACCESS-OM3 evaluation paper discussion

Agenda (1 hr) (Chaired by Adele Morrison, Notes by ):
Participant list

1. Very brief overview of existing and planned runs (Andrew, 5 minutes)

2. Discussion of current plan for the paper scope / timeline (Andrew? 10 minutes)

  • two objectives:
    1. a collection of notebooks providing assessment of how configs perform with respect to things that are of interest to community - see GitHub - ACCESS-Community-Hub/access-om3-paper-1: Plotting notebooks and discussion for ACCESS-OM3 model description paper · GitHub
    2. a model announcement paper covering a subset of these configs and assessment metrics, perhaps along the lines of Kiss et al 2020.
  • paper scope:
    • ocean / ice / BGC / waves ?
      • TBD in the future, unclear yet
      • Currently waves are only in a 100km config, with ERA5 and KPP. We don’t (yet) have a config with both waves and BGC.
    • resolution: 100km / 25km / 8km ?
      • COSIMA community has more interest in the 8km, but for the coupled community.
      • The 25km is very valuable to compare along CM3.
      • OM3-25km has some improvements compared to OM2-025, which might make it a more attractive choice.
      • 100km has not been a focus for development (except with waves).
    • CM3 and ESM3 will also have announcement paper(s)
  • people are more motivated to contribute to assessment if it leads to a paper
  • more community interest in 8km than lower resolution

This discussion is unfinished, and will be continued in future meetings leading up to the COSIMA hackathon.

3. Overview of how to contribute (@cbull, 5 minutes)

A non-exhaustive (!) list:

How to help with paper writing

The paper is being written on Overleaf. There’s almost nothing written so far. Please ask @aekiss if you’d like edit access (the link is “view only”).

How to contribute to analysis and discussion of figures

All the below are guidelines, not requirements!

The steps:

  • Look at the experiment table to choose which experiment(s) you would like to focus on; it is recommended you choose the latest experiment, which will have the least issues. The older ones are only useful for comparing the impact of the configuration differences between them.
  • Have a look at the metrics “mega-issue” to determine what metric you’d like to contribute;
  • Get access to evaluation repository (open “user request” issue here, or send @cbull or @aekiss your GitHub username);
  • Modify the template to do your analysis and then upload back to GitHub;
    • the template is useful because it allows to re-run the notebook automatically with different experiments! (by injecting a different value for esm_file).
    • Your code can go in the polished directory or in the sandbox, for unpolished code
  • Share your figures in an issue related to your metric.
    • You can copy-paste figures in the issues as well without uploading the code. Encouraged to upload the code.

Please add yourself to the citation file, contributions that are “used” will lead to paper co-authorship

See the README. Help is available!

Slides:
2026.06.25_OM3_howtocontribute.pptx (1.6 MB)

4. Discussion of how people have been going so far with the mechanisms of contributing - do we need to lower the bar for contributions? (Adele, 5 minutes)

No comments

5. Allocate unclaimed / abandoned issues to people, and create new issues as desired (Adele, 5 minutes)

Some allocations have been made, but there are still issues unassigned, and always scope for more issues that are not currently listed in the mega-thread.

6. Open floor for people to share and discuss figures they have made (all, 15 minutes)

7. Dream list and priority of additional runs (sensitivity tests, 8km etc) that we would like to do by November COSIMA evaluation hackathon. (15 minutes)