-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 31
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
Examining when ice formation and breakup occurs #251
Comments
I'm not familiar with the mda.lakes package, but does |
Oh, I didn't realize this was an The function is here. I'm guessing there is either a change w/ GLM v3 that isn't supported or part of the move to the updated |
Yes, that works fine. I was using the following series of commands to compare actual and measured ice freeze and breakup: sprintf('Ice ON: %g mean absolute diff', mean(abs(as.numeric(iceboth$on_mod - iceboth$on_obs, units='days')))) |
The error is in the |
This is a nice function though - maybe it should be in glmtools? |
For us ice people it would be great.
Dale
…Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 18, 2019, at 3:57 PM, hdugan ***@***.***> wrote:
This is a nice function though - maybe it should be in glmtools?
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.
|
I'm worried about exposing it in the package because it can give you the wrong answer (it makes assumptions about ice dates relative to peak temperatures). I think it is right 99.9% of the time, but consider it to be more of an analysis method that you'd do on the data coming out of Or perhaps we expose it but treat as experimental? |
If it’s included, could it be called an ‘estimator’ or some other similar term that indicates it’s derived from assumed relationships that really are statistical in nature? Alternatively, is there a need for more of a GLM data analysis package, kind of lake the existing lake physics package you created, Jordan?
---------------------------------------------
Paul Hanson
Distinguished Research Professor
UW Center for Limnology
From: Jordan S Read <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Reply-To: USGS-R/glmtools <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: Friday, July 19, 2019 at 8:50 AM
To: USGS-R/glmtools <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Cc: Subscribed <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: Re: [USGS-R/glmtools] Examining when ice formation and breakup occurs (#251)
I'm worried about exposing it in the package because it can give you the wrong answer (it makes assumptions about ice dates relative to peak temperatures). I think it is right 99.9% of the time, but consider it to be more of an analysis method that you'd do on the data coming out of get_ice() (or _var) where you'd have control and visibility in the decision of when to declare on vs off.
Or perhaps we expose it but treat as experimental?
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#251>, or mute the thread<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AADDY7PGJEEATLSUWELK67TQAHBD3ANCNFSM4IE4HO4A>.
|
I would be OK working with an experimental package? Right now I am just trying to see if ice on and off dates are close, Rather than looking through the daily ice thicknesses, this was working great. Is there a way just to grab a few lines from mda.lakes that I can run? |
Dale, I forked the mda repo and fixed the function. You can use it here:
Don't know if you want a pull request to the main repo |
I used to use a command:
iceonoff_mod = mda.lakes::get_ice_onoff(ice_data, get_temp(nc_file))
to get ice information
This now gives me the following error:
Error in ice_runs[, "values"] : subscript out of bounds
Anyway to fix this so that I can compare actual and observed freeze and breakup dates?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: