Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Updated AEI initialization to Mehta (2024) #672

Open
wants to merge 24 commits into
base: develop
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

FelicitasBeier
Copy link
Member

@FelicitasBeier FelicitasBeier commented Apr 26, 2024

🐦 Description of this PR 🐦

  • updated (non-default) area equipped for irrigation initilization data from Mehta (2022) to Mehta (2024)
  • Note: This PR requires an update of the cellular preprocessing. It should therefore be merged after Patrick's PR, which comes with an update of the input vectors in the default.cfg.

🔧 Checklist for PR creator 🔧

  • Label pull request from the label list.

    • Low risk: Simple bugfixes (missing files, updated documentation, typos) or changes in start or output scripts
    • Medium risk: Uncritical changes in the model core (e.g. moderate modifications in non-default realizations)
    • High risk: Critical changes in model core or default settings (e.g. changing a model default or adjusting a core mechanic in the model)
  • Self-review own code

    • No hard coded numbers and cluster/country/region names.
    • The new code doesn't contain declared but unused parameters or variables.
    • magpie4 R library has been updated accordingly and backwards compatible where necessary.
    • scenario_config.csv has been updated accordingly (important if default.cfg has been updated)
  • Document changes

    • Add changes to CHANGELOG.md
    • Where relevant, put In-code documentation comments
    • Properly address updates in interfaces in the module documentations
    • run goxygen::goxygen() and verify the modified code is properly documented
  • Perform test runs

    • Low risk:
      • Run a compilation check via Rscript start.R --> "compilation check"
    • Medium risk:
      • Run test runs via Rscript start.R --> "test runs"
      • Check logs for errors/warnings
    • High risk:
      • Run test runs via Rscript start.R --> "test runs"
      • Check logs for errors/warnings
      • Default run from the PR target branch for comparison
      • Provide relevant comparison plots (land-use, emissions, food prices, land-use intensity,...)

📉 Performance changes 📈

  • Current develop branch default : ** mins
  • This PR's default : ** mins

🚨 Checklist for reviewer 🚨

  • PR is labeled correctly
  • Code changes look reasonable
    • No hard coded numbers and cluster/country/region names.
    • No unnecessary increase in module interfaces
    • model behavior/performance is satisfactory.
  • Changes are properly documented
    • CHANGELOG is updated correctly
    • Updates in interfaces have been properly addressed in the module documentations
    • In-code documentation looks appropriate
  • content review done (at least 1)
  • RSE review done (at least 1)

@FelicitasBeier FelicitasBeier added Minor Smaller modifications Low risk Low risk data update labels Apr 26, 2024
@FelicitasBeier FelicitasBeier marked this pull request as ready for review April 26, 2024 08:10
pascal-sauer
pascal-sauer previously approved these changes Apr 26, 2024
validation = "rev4.104_h12_validation.tgz",
cfg$input <- c(regional = "rev4.106_h12_magpie.tgz",
cellular = "rev4.106_h12_fd712c0b_cellularmagpie_c200_MRI-ESM2-0-ssp370_lpjml-8e6c5eb1.tgz",
validation = "rev4.106_h12_validation.tgz",
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm always a bit unsure, these datasets should also be put into scenario_config and the fsec scenario config, right?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, absolutely! Thanks for pointing this out!
I'm currently waiting if/how we'll solve the warnings in the preprocessing. Once this is solved, I can set up a new preprocessing for both default as well as the FSEC scenario config.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We are also still waiting for Patrick's PR. It'll have to be merged before mine because it also contains changes in the preprocessing that affect the GAMS code.

@pascal-sauer pascal-sauer dismissed their stale review April 29, 2024 13:40

things were still changed after the review, please request another review once the PR is ready :)

Copy link
Contributor

@pascal-sauer pascal-sauer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

input data still needs to be set, otherwise looks good :)

@flohump
Copy link
Contributor

flohump commented May 22, 2024

input data still needs to be set, otherwise looks good :)

Please also update scenario_fsec.csv

@FelicitasBeier
Copy link
Member Author

input data still needs to be set, otherwise looks good :)

Yes. This is what comes in Patrick's PR.

@FelicitasBeier
Copy link
Member Author

input data still needs to be set, otherwise looks good :)

Please also update scenario_fsec.csv

Yes, this is what comes in Patrick's PR.

Copy link
Contributor

@pvjeetze pvjeetze left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Generally looks good to me. Please see my minor comments and also update the input data.

cfg$input <- c(regional = "rev4.105_h12_magpie.tgz",
cellular = "rev4.105_h12_fd712c0b_cellularmagpie_c200_MRI-ESM2-0-ssp370_lpjml-8e6c5eb1.tgz",
validation = "rev4.105_h12_validation.tgz",
cfg$input <- c(regional = "WARNINGS66_rev4.107Mehta_h12_magpie.tgz",
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The rev4.106 preprocessing is ready now :)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
data update Low risk Low risk Minor Smaller modifications
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants