Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
Make difference module handle circular cubes #1990
Make difference module handle circular cubes #1990
Changes from 16 commits
50d08bb
e4bce85
beabc9e
141ee1f
9535d45
c442023
62dc4d9
636ec69
fa2b8b0
53659a6
617bd27
0910cd6
8082dd0
22e920a
ce71d4c
b74833b
ccdc67f
c51ad05
8eb9195
939ac46
e3496eb
175e825
6fbc3eb
31fceb3
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Question for the reviewer:
This will only work if the 'wrap around' point is positive. This is the case for test cubes that are 'symmetric' in nature (eg. points in cube at [120, 0, 120] or [-175, 165, 155, ..., -25, -15, -5, 5, 15, 25, ..., 165, 175] - wrap around point = 180) but not ones that are 'offset' (eg. [-170, -160, -150, ..., -20, -10, 0, 10, 20, ..., 150, 160, 170, 180] - wrap around point = -175).
In the offset case given above, this would calculate the 'wrap around point' to be 185. Not 'wrong' per-se but certainly potentially confusing.
I could add extra logic to make this work for offset grids. However given that global data from STaGE is 'symmetrical', and the cubes produced by the set_up_variable_cube test helper match this convention, I'm not sure whether or not this is something worth investing time in.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
...Thinking about it, for the symmetrical case above, the np.mean(...) line always resolves to 180, so I could get rid of it altogether and just always put the wrap around point at 180.
The above does better handle the case where the cube uses 0 -> 360 instead of -180 -> 180 but maybe this never comes up.
I suppose the line could also be used as a test. I.e. if np.mean(...) != 180 raise ValueError("Difference Plugin only handles circular cubes if their points are spread symmetrically about a plane intersecting the prime meridian").
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There's a nice function I knew existed somewhere for calculating the circular mean. It's in scipy https://docs.scipy.org/doc/scipy/reference/generated/scipy.stats.circmean.html . This might be helpful but it does still need to be told the bounds to know where to wrap around so I don't know if it solves every problem but should simplify the offset case.
Id keep this function as general as possible. so I wouldn't raise an error, at worst a warning.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Have split this calculation out into its own function which now uses circmean from scipy.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It would be clearer to have the index as 0 rather than :1.
As a separate issue it is would be better not to assume the order of the coordinates in a cube instead getting the index of the diff_axis from the cube.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Have replaced the :1/:-1 with reshapes.
I'm not sure I understand the second point. Would be good to discuss.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Have now fixed this. Does a single reshape if needed with [-1, 1] and takes the array axis to diff along from the cube dim-coord number rather than assuming the order of the coordinates on cube.data.