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

Reliability diagram is connecting points incorrectly #428

Open
23 tasks
bikegeek opened this issue Apr 1, 2024 · 2 comments
Open
23 tasks

Reliability diagram is connecting points incorrectly #428

bikegeek opened this issue Apr 1, 2024 · 2 comments
Assignees
Labels
alert: NEED ACCOUNT KEY Need to assign an account key to this issue alert: NEED CYCLE ASSIGNMENT Need to assign to a release development cycle alert: NEED MORE DEFINITION Not yet actionable, additional definition required type: bug Fix something that is not working

Comments

@bikegeek
Copy link
Collaborator

bikegeek commented Apr 1, 2024

Replace italics below with details for this issue.

Describe the Problem

Using PCT linetype output supplied by NOAA for HREF and RRFS model produces a plot that doesn't appear consistent with what is expected:
href_rrfsens_apcp_24_reliability_diagram

The connection of points leading to the triangular shape in the upper portion of the plot is the region of inconsistency.
This could potentially be an issue with the METcalcpy agg_stat.py that gives rise to this irregular behavior.

Expected Behavior

Provide a clear and concise description of what you expected to happen here.

Environment

Describe your runtime environment:
1. Machine: (e.g. HPC name, Linux Workstation, Mac Laptop)
2. OS: (e.g. RedHat Linux, MacOS)
3. Software version number(s)

To Reproduce

Describe the steps to reproduce the behavior:
1. Go to '...'
2. Click on '....'
3. Scroll down to '....'
4. See error
Post relevant sample data following these instructions:
https://dtcenter.org/community-code/model-evaluation-tools-met/met-help-desk#ftp

Relevant Deadlines

List relevant project deadlines here or state NONE.

Funding Source

Define the source of funding and account keys here or state NONE.

Define the Metadata

Assignee

  • Select engineer(s) or no engineer required
  • Select scientist(s) or no scientist required

Labels

  • Select component(s)
  • Select priority
  • Select requestor(s)

Projects and Milestone

  • Select Organization level Project for support of the current coordinated release
  • Select Repository level Project for development toward the next official release or add alert: NEED CYCLE ASSIGNMENT label
  • Select Milestone as the next bugfix version

Define Related Issue(s)

Consider the impact to the other METplus components.

Bugfix Checklist

See the METplus Workflow for details.

  • Complete the issue definition above, including the Time Estimate and Funding Source.
  • Fork this repository or create a branch of main_<Version>.
    Branch name: bugfix_<Issue Number>_main_<Version>_<Description>
  • Fix the bug and test your changes.
  • Add/update log messages for easier debugging.
  • Add/update unit tests.
  • Add/update documentation.
  • Add any new Python packages to the METplus Components Python Requirements table.
  • Push local changes to GitHub.
  • Submit a pull request to merge into main_<Version>.
    Pull request: bugfix <Issue Number> main_<Version> <Description>
  • Define the pull request metadata, as permissions allow.
    Select: Reviewer(s) and Development issues
    Select: Organization level software support Project for the current coordinated release
    Select: Milestone as the next bugfix version
  • Iterate until the reviewer(s) accept and merge your changes.
  • Delete your fork or branch.
  • Complete the steps above to fix the bug on the develop branch.
    Branch name: bugfix_<Issue Number>_develop_<Description>
    Pull request: bugfix <Issue Number> develop <Description>
    Select: Reviewer(s) and Development issues
    Select: Repository level development cycle Project for the next official release
    Select: Milestone as the next official version
  • Close this issue.
@bikegeek bikegeek added type: bug Fix something that is not working alert: NEED ACCOUNT KEY Need to assign an account key to this issue alert: NEED MORE DEFINITION Not yet actionable, additional definition required alert: NEED CYCLE ASSIGNMENT Need to assign to a release development cycle labels Apr 1, 2024
@bikegeek bikegeek self-assigned this Apr 1, 2024
@bikegeek bikegeek added this to the METplotpy-3.0.0 milestone Apr 1, 2024
@bikegeek
Copy link
Collaborator Author

bikegeek commented Apr 2, 2024

Binbin made the following observation, which might help in tracking down the cause of this issue:

One thing that reminds me is HREF is a 10-member
ensemble while RRFSENS is a 14-member ensemble. I looked closely at the reliability diagram
and found that the last point of one model is located at the top (top point of the triangle).
That point is far away from the model curve. Not sure why the last point is located at that
place. Are both treated as a 10-member ensemble? I'll follow the discussion and provide
further information If I find it.

@BinbinZhou-NOAA
Copy link

To identify if the issue is related to the multiple models, remove one of models, and generate the reliability diagram for just one model to see this issue is still there.

Binbin

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
alert: NEED ACCOUNT KEY Need to assign an account key to this issue alert: NEED CYCLE ASSIGNMENT Need to assign to a release development cycle alert: NEED MORE DEFINITION Not yet actionable, additional definition required type: bug Fix something that is not working
Projects
Status: 📋 Backlog
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants