Cryosphere Modelling WG meeting:
13/Dec/23
Attendees: 13
Merit allocations:
- Review of guidelines, which can be found ACCESS-NRI’s website: ACCESS-NRI Merit Allocation Guidelines - ACCESS-NRI
- Key dates:
- 15 March: Q2 prioritised requests need to be in place
- 15 June: Q3+4 prioritised requests will need to be in place
- Q1 requests will be made by the discretion of the co-chairs - make these on the Hive (follow Felicity’s instructions from this past post: Cryosphere Working Group Resource Allocation Guidelines)
- Encourage everyone to put in requests!
Update from co-chairs:
- Chen has joined as a co-chair
Review responses from developers (initial contact)
- Spreadsheet: Ice sheet models - Google Sheets
- Notes column shows initial feedback on whether there is capacity to support with coupling into ACCESS
- Olga Sergienko is developing an ISM and will be part of MOM6 but at this stage there is no documentation on what that models has; although SSA model (no higher-order physics) but she’s happy to answer questions in the Developer Questionnaire.
- Overall, happy with the initial feedback.
- Comment from group about CISM could be easy to follow from the ocean/sea-ice perspective; will need to weigh the ease of coupling vs other aspects like the physics, etc.
Review google form responses to ToRs doc
- 13 responses (6 ice sheet modellers)
- Only 2 questions where we reached consensus
- Hydrofrastrucre/surface hydrology scheme available (nice to have)
- Code management for community development (essential)
- Broader agreement across:
- Code management for community development (essential)
- Higher-order physics (essential)
- Open and accessible code (essential)
- Mass/energy conserving (essential)
- Relationship with developers (essential)
- Unstructured mesh (essential)
- Automatic differentiation (nice to have)
- Remaining criteria was less clear
- Felicity will be doing a full summary and will share
- Suggested next steps:
- We had 10 criteria (including physics/schemes) that were identified as essential
- Pending review, adopt these essential criteria
- Determine which models adhere to these (including through discussions with developers)
- Exclude models that do not meet these criteria
- Relationship with developers generally considered essential
- What minimum requirements do we expect from developers?
- Do we exclude any models now if developers have said they are unable to support? (Grisli, KORI, MALI)
- Higher-order physics generally considered essential
- Do we exclude any models that do not adhere?
- Discussion:
- Developer support
- We want really good relationships, open, sees advantage that Australia can provide
- Want a 2-way relationship, and a way to get support
- Open to making changes
- Established user community, having more than just a single developer and a community to engage and tap into for expertise.
- Suggestions
- Could aim to have the nice to have category of criteria be things we might want to see down the road.
- Rule out those that can’t offer development support now.
- Wait on ruling out based on higher-order physics to chat with developers (check before eliminating)
- Could also recast the developer relationship to how welcoming they are to suggestions for variations / modifications.
- Developer support
- Request to the WG - need help populate spreadsheet on the potential models: Ice sheet models - Google Sheets
- Timing: aiming for early January
- Volunteers from meeting:
- Roland - SICOPOLIS
- Poul - CISM
- Start with essential criteria - if we find out any lacking, then we don’t worry about fully populating
Timeframe for determining ISM
- Publish essential/desirable criteria (aiming for end of Dec 2023)
- Developer questionnaire (early Jan)
- Aiming for March for the expert panel
Other things
- Ethics subgroup: Pat, Lawrence, Kelsey
- Currently adopted COSIMA code of ethics in the interim but will this group will work on feedback from September WG meeting and if we want to develop anything further
- Compute subgroup: Dan Atwater, …any other volunteers?
- Will share a spreadsheet calling for any reference datasets that the WG would like to see available at NCI?
- Next year we’ll be going to monthly meetings - please remove the 2023 calendar invite if you have it locally added.
- Next meeting will be in March - we will add the scheduled dates/info to the Hive.