Changes between Version 106 and Version 107 of Scientific Advisory Board/Agenda/2013-06-18


Ignore:
Timestamp:
2013-07-05T18:28:43+02:00 (7 years ago)
Author:
clevy
Comment:

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • Scientific Advisory Board/Agenda/2013-06-18

    v106 v107  
    6363"Conclusions on the fly" in attached document below 
    6464 
    65 '''Notes from the leaders of the sessions''' i 
     65'''Notes from the leaders of the sessions'''  
    6666 
    6767'''Session 1: NEMO platform: seamless to what extend? (Leaders: J. Holt and P. Marsaleix)''' 
     
    6969See also table in attached document at bottom of the page.[[BR]]On seemless modelling in NEMO: 
    7070 
    71  1. There is not a great drive nor enthusiasm for multi-scale (e.g. unstructured meshes) approaches presently within this community. Personally,  I somewhat disagree with this view of the future but I agree the approaches (e.g. an ocean model within gung-ho) need to be better developed, tested and demonstrated before we might expect substantial community buy in. Certainly , I still see this door as being open. 
    72  1.  There are upscaling issues. These weren’t listed in detail, but include river inputs/coastal currents, dense water formation on shelf seas, frictional processes at shelf slope, dense overflows and ‘pinch points’, and a whole list of BGC/ecosystem processes. These can be addressed to some extent with global high resolution and 2-way nesting (e.g. AGRIF), without resorting to a full multi-scale approach. 
     71 1. There is not a great drive nor enthusiasm for multi-scale (e.g. unstructured meshes) approaches presently within this community. Personally,  I somewhat disagree with this view of the future but I agree the approaches (e.g. an ocean model within gung-ho) need to be better developed, tested and demonstrated before we might expect substantial community buy in. Certainly , I still see this door as being open. 
     72 1. There are upscaling issues. These weren’t listed in detail, but include river inputs/coastal currents, dense water formation on shelf seas, frictional processes at shelf slope, dense overflows and ‘pinch points’, and a whole list of BGC/ecosystem processes. These can be addressed to some extent with global high resolution and 2-way nesting (e.g. AGRIF), without resorting to a full multi-scale approach. 
    7373 1. There is a clear need for a near coastal capability in nemo – this includes wetting/drying and surface wave coupling. Concerns were expressed (and noted) that the wetting/drying approach should not be obtrusive (at least initially), but methods such moving boundary approaches could be considered in the future for paeleo work. There are many approaches to wave coupling and lots of physical implication to it depending on the problem at hand (ie waves on current, coupled wave-current or coupled wind-wave-current). Curvilinear coordinates are an important capability for near coastal work, and with it nemo has a potential advantage of being much more computationally efficient than unstructured mesh options – very useful for longer term near-coastal simulations. 
    7474 1. Resolution and parameterisations need to be considered together and both require development, noting we are moving towards submesoscale permitting models needed to actual resolve the mesoscale, and that observational resolution is increasing to accommodate this. 
    7575 
    76  [[BR]]'''Session 2: New dynamical cores, HPC and science     (Leaders: S. Masson & N. Wood)''' 
     76''' Session 2: New dynamical cores, HPC and science     (Leaders: S. Masson & N. Wood)''' 
    7777 
    7878 * No strong driver to move away from orthogonal curvilinear coordinate with quadrilateral C-grid, together with coupling provided by AGRIF. Question: Does that approach have a finite life time or will it work forever? See also Jason's comments. 
     
    8181 * Scope for sharing this approach with !GungHo most likely lies in the Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) and possibly also in the Parallelisation Systems (PSy) layer (though the extent of the latter is unclear). 
    8282 
    83 At the meeting I (N. Wood) additionally expressed my personal point of view that having a document, which clearly outlines what the critical scientific properties of NEMO are, could be invaluable, as well as having a clear specification of the scope of applications. In any development there will inevitably be a number of compromises to be made. Having these two documents allows an informed decision over which compromises to make and which not. This allows more progress and less stalemate.'''''' 
     83At the meeting I (N. Wood) additionally expressed my personal point of view that having a document, which clearly outlines what the critical scientific properties of NEMO are, could be invaluable, as well as having a clear specification of the scope of applications. In any development there will inevitably be a number of compromises to be made. Having these two documents allows an informed decision over which compromises to make and which not. This allows more progress and less stalemate.''''''''''' 
    8484 
    8585'''Session 3: Sea-ice and biogeochemical components (Leaders: O. Aumont & M. Vancoppenolle)''' 
    8686 
    87 [[BR]]'''Session 4: Is AGRIF a major feature of NEMO? (Leaders: L. Debreu & D. Iovino)''' 
     87Coming soon... 
     88 
     89'''Session 4: Is AGRIF a major feature of NEMO? (Leaders: L. Debreu & D. Iovino)''' 
    8890 
    8991Most of the audience agrees that AGRIF is a fundamental tool for NEMO.[[BR]]The higher the interest in high-resolution regional modeling, shelf and coastal areas, the more useful AGRIF becomes. So, more effort is needed to develop, maintain, test and document NEMO-AGRIF. 
     
    119121 
    120122'''Session 5: Contours and limits of the assimilation component of NEMO''' '''(Leaders: P. Brasseur & S. Dobricic)''' 
     123 
     124Coming soon...'''''' 
    121125 
    122126'''Session 6: NEMO validation and contours of user support  (Leaders : A. Guarnieri & J. Siddorn)'''