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

Parent issue for variability support #353

Closed
5 tasks done
willu47 opened this issue Apr 10, 2019 · 1 comment
Closed
5 tasks done

Parent issue for variability support #353

willu47 opened this issue Apr 10, 2019 · 1 comment
Assignees
Labels
parent_issue A mega-issue to collect together all parts of a feature
Milestone

Comments

@willu47
Copy link
Member

willu47 commented Apr 10, 2019

Goal

We want to propagate an ensemble of e.g. weather scenarios through a system-of-systems model to assess the resilience of the system-of-systems

Ideally, this could be available to the user at the command-line, with the subcommand smif prepare and arguments [modelrun_template] [scenario_name] [variant range], or perhaps some useful helpers for specifying a range of scenario variant names like --start weather_001 --end weather_100

Related goal

We want to perform a global sensitivity analysis, and have generated a sample of input data we wish to propagate through the system-of-systems to assess sensitivity of one or more model outputs to the inputs.

Core functionality

Alternatively, the steps could be:

  • Add the ensemble as a dimension within a smif scenario
  • Autogenerate a batch of model runs, one for each ensemble realisation
  • perform batch model run
  • obtain and collate results
@tlestang
Copy link
Contributor

tlestang commented May 1, 2019

Issues #362 , #363 and #364 have been addressed within branch variability.
Scripts addressing issues #362 and #363 can be found in

Currently those scripts are merely drafts for two functions with the same names in cli/__init__.py, which the smif prepare command actually invoke (see comment in #364)

Note - For the purpose of testing, I slightly modified the energy_central model run definition, adding the weather_at_home scenario.

@tlestang tlestang closed this as completed May 1, 2019
@tlestang tlestang reopened this May 1, 2019
tlestang added a commit that referenced this issue May 1, 2019
@tlestang tlestang mentioned this issue May 23, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
parent_issue A mega-issue to collect together all parts of a feature
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants