You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
We are porting CDAT tools to xCDAT (including vertical regridding). It was suggested that we leverage xgcm in xcdat for vertical regridding (which is well underway).
One part of the xgcm API that confuses me is the target_data argument in grid_transform. I think that this represents the vertical levels in the source dataset that will be remapped to a specified set of levels:
target_data can be e.g. the existing coordinate along an axis, like depth. xgcm automatically detects the appropriate
coordinate and then transforms the data from the input positions to the desired positions defined in target. This
is the default behavior. The method can also be used for more complex cases like transforming a dataarray into new
coordinates that are defined by e.g. a tracer field like temperature, density, etc.
I was thrown off by target_data. I'm wondering if something like source_grid_data might be more intuitive? Or am I just thinking about this the wrong way?
reacted with thumbs up emoji reacted with thumbs down emoji reacted with laugh emoji reacted with hooray emoji reacted with confused emoji reacted with heart emoji reacted with rocket emoji reacted with eyes emoji
-
We are porting CDAT tools to xCDAT (including vertical regridding). It was suggested that we leverage xgcm in xcdat for vertical regridding (which is well underway).
One part of the xgcm API that confuses me is the
target_data
argument ingrid_transform
. I think that this represents the vertical levels in the source dataset that will be remapped to a specified set of levels:I was thrown off by target_data. I'm wondering if something like
source_grid_data
might be more intuitive? Or am I just thinking about this the wrong way?Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions