MODE CSI statistics produces spurious results

[bikegeek]

Describe the Problem

There is an issue with the way the MODE CSI statistics are being calculated (inconsistent with what is documented, and results are not consistent). This was discovered and reported in the METplus Github Discussion:

• MODE Object CSI vs Object Area CSI in METviewer METplus#2496

This is calculated in the R script code. A similar issue exists in METcalcpy:

• MODE CSI calculations result in spurious results METcalcpy#360

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.

• METplus, MET, METdataio, METviewer, METexpress, METcalcpy, METplotpy

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.
• 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]

The fix apparently does not work. @CPKalb tested on 'dakota' and the issue persists.

[bikegeek]

Fix is working for @CPKalb , closing again.

[CPKalb]

The python version is also affected by the same issue and likely needs to be updated as well

[bikegeek]

There is already an issue for the Python version: dtcenter/METcalcpy#360 --------------- Minna Win Pronouns: she/her National Center for Atmospheric Research DTC/Research Applications Lab Phone: 303-497-8423 *My work hours may not be your work hours. Please do not feel obliged to reply to this email outside of your normal working hours.* ---------------

…

On Fri, Feb 16, 2024 at 11:29 AM Christina Kalb ***@***.***> wrote: The python version is also affected by the same issue and likely needs to be updated as well — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#516 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AA4UJHUGFFAY7BCN4IFNEWDYT6QRFAVCNFSM6AAAAABDJFPB6WVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMYTSNBZGA3TCMRUGM> . You are receiving this because you modified the open/close state.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[CPKalb]

Ah, great. Let me know if you want me to test the python issue. I have xmls saved that make it easy to test