Hi Stuart, This is a bug! The read methods should all reset their target. Your original controlfile was correct.
I will immediately commit some code to fix this. I hope to have it merged by tomorrow morning. //Richard Den tors 17 mars 2022 kl 16:23 skrev Fox, Stuart < stuart....@metoffice.gov.uk>: > Hi Richard, > > > > I think I have now tracked down the source of my issue (and identified the > fix)! > > > > It seems there has been a change to the way that ReadARTSCAT works? > Previously it looks like it re-initialised the abs_lines variable each time > it was called, whereas now it appears to append onto the end of the > existing variable. Since I am reading separate line files for H2O and O3 > the way I was approaching this was: > > ArrayOfAbsorptionLinesCreate(temp_lines) > > ReadARTSCAT(filename="aer_3.6_lines_0_5THz.H2O.xml.gz", > > abs_lines=temp_lines, > > …) > > Append(abs_lines, temp_lines) > > ReadARTSCAT(filename="JPL_fast.O3.xml.gz", > > abs_lines=temp_lines, > > …) > > Append(abs_lines, temp_lines) > > > > Using the new behaviour I can either just use two calls to ReadARTSCAT to > read directly into abs_lines (assuming this is actually the intended > behaviour?), or reset temp_lines between the two calls. Without this then, > as suspected, it adds the H2O lines twice. > > > > Does this make sense? > > > > Stuart > > > > *From:* Richard Larsson <ric.lars...@gmail.com> > *Sent:* 17 March 2022 13:13 > *To:* Fox, Stuart <stuart....@metoffice.gov.uk> > *Subject:* Re: Help, something broke my simulations! > > > > *This email was received from an external source. Always check sender > details, links & attachments.* > > Hi Stuart, > > > > Can you do workspace.Print(workspace.abs_lines_per_species)? If you have > the mirrored lines, then they should be there, towards the end of the water > tag. (It might be better to access these from the > workspace.abs_lines_per_species.value if you have too many lines. > workspace.abs_lines_per_species.value[N][M].lines [or something like that] > should give you the lines of the M+1:th band of your N+1:th abs_species > tag. The last of these for water should have negative values.) > > > > (I think it would be better to set the mirroring tag to something like > Lorentz using workspace.abs_lines_per_speciesSetMirroringForSpecies, since > this should be the physically correct way of doing it.) > > > > //Richard > > > > Den tors 17 mars 2022 kl 12:50 skrev Fox, Stuart < > stuart....@metoffice.gov.uk>: > > Hi Richard, > > > > I really don’t think there’s a copy/paste error – I am running exactly the > same set of instructions (via pyarts) and I get the different results > between the different ARTS versions. > > > > Propmat_clearsky_agenda is: > > workspace.propmat_clearskyInit() > > workspace.propmat_clearskyAddXsecAgenda() > > workspace.propmat_clearskyAddLines() > > workspace.propmat_clearskyAddPredefined() > > and abs_xsec_agenda is: > > workspace.abs_xsec_per_speciesInit() > > workspace.abs_xsec_per_speciesAddConts() > > > > Have you changed abs_lines_per_speciesMakeManualMirroringSpecies? (I am > using this for the water vapour but not the ozone)? > > > > I will look at putting together a simpler test case… > > > > Stuart > > *From:* Richard Larsson <ric.lars...@gmail.com> > *Sent:* 17 March 2022 11:30 > *To:* Fox, Stuart <stuart....@metoffice.gov.uk> > *Cc:* arts_dev.mi@lists.uni-hamburg.de > *Subject:* Re: Help, something broke my simulations! > > > > *This email was received from an external source. Always check sender > details, links & attachments.* > > Hi Stuart, > > > > I would need some way to test this to give any real answers. For now I > can only ask questions. > > > > It looks like you are somehow computing the 183 GHz line twice. This > should not happen easily. Have you somehow made a copy-paste error that > still retains a "complete" model in this setup? > > > > Are you using abs_xsec_per_speciesAddLines or propmat_clearskyAddLines? > (It would be fantastic if you are using both, because then the error would > be exactly that, but your ozone lines make it look like you are not > computing them twice.) > > > > There are some small changes in abs_xsec_per_speciesAddLines. I don't > think they should cause any issues, but change is change so it is a > possibility. > > > > With hope, > > //Richard > > > > Den tors 17 mars 2022 kl 11:57 skrev Fox, Stuart < > stuart....@metoffice.gov.uk>: > > Hi ARTS devs, > > > > One of the recent-(ish) commits to ARTS has broken my simulations! With > the current head of master I get big differences in simulated brightness > temperature around a water vapour absorption line when I do simulations > that also include ozone (blue line in attached plots), compared to > simulations without (orange line). This didn’t use to be the case, at least > back at commit 3b6565f. Both water vapour and ozone in these simulations > are calculated using absorption line catalogues rather than “complete” > models – if I use a complete model for water vapour the problem goes away. > > > > Before I spend a bit of time putting together a simple test case and/or > trying to identify which commits caused the change, does anyone know > already what the cause might be, and what I need to do to fix it (e.g. > changes to controlfiles)? > > > > Regards, > > > > Stuart > >
