学者如何/机构运行大型气候模拟的计算挑战?- 江南体育网页版- - - - -地球科学堆江南电子竞技平台栈交换 最近30从www.hoelymoley.com 2023 - 07 - 07 - t06:38:34z //www.hoelymoley.com/feeds/question/22826 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/rdf //www.hoelymoley.com/q/22826 6 学者如何/机构运行大型气候模拟的计算挑战? krishnab //www.hoelymoley.com/users/15732 2021 - 09 - 15 - t14:22:27z 2021 - 09 - 19 - t17:21:42z < p >我已经刷牙近来对pde数值方法,和气候模型提供一组丰富的实践模式和理念。< >强然而,我有点困惑学者如何做大的气候模型研究——像CESM, WRF,或其他模型由GDFL NCAR——鉴于运行这些模型的计算挑战?< / >强这是全球环流模型,甚至有限区域大气物理模型与发生在多尺度模拟。我不知道大多数机构设置在本地运行这些模型,还是有一些方法来发送新的模型NCAR或类似研究所测试准确性,等。< / p > < p >运行大型气候模拟需要超级计算机或大型集群资源,以及精致的MPI和mapreduce操作。Since a lot of that model code is written in fortran, that just exacerbates the portability problem since there is less ability to "abstract" away some of this configuration in objects.

Writing and running an individual component model or "parameterization" model for one of these larger models seems manageable. That task just requires the scholar to write something doable over one or a few machines. But then how can that same person test his/her model inside of one of the larger climate models?

I have been doing some research on this, but have not found much. I found some descriptions of how these larger scale models are built from their development documentation. The code is available as open source, but something like the WRF has 1.5 million lines of code. So debugging it or customizing it to a different cluster seems pretty tough--though I don't have any person experience doing that with a climate model. I have also spoken with some climate folks at Caltech who are working on developing their own large scale climate models, but they could only explain the challenges that they faced with building a flexible meshing scheme, etc., The Caltech folks did not tell me about their experiences using the established large scale climate models.

Hence, I figured I would ask the SE community.

UPDATE: As per some feedback below, I just wanted to explain why this question is posted on ES instead of the Academics.SE. The thought was that Academics.SE is a much more general site across all of academia and many people there don't know about the nuances of numerical computing and the computational setup that goes along with it. Hence, I posted the question on ES where the audience is more familiar with running these types of simulations. I recognize that this question is "soft" however it seemed relevant to others conducting ES and Atmospheric research--especially those who want to do research on this topic and come from other disciplines.

//www.hoelymoley.com/questions/22826/-/22833 # 22833 5 回答半日西蒙学者如何/机构运行大型气候模拟的计算挑战? 半日西蒙 //www.hoelymoley.com/users/39 2021 - 09 - 17 - t06:11:24z 2021 - 09 - 18 - t11:11:59z < p >这个问题有点模糊,与多个方面,但我会尽力而为。计算资源< / p > < h2 > < / h2 > < p >一些大学有自己的集群或超级计算机。但许多国家也有地区或国家设施。例如,< a href = " https://www.archer2.ac.uk/ " rel = " nofollow noreferrer " > ARCHER2 < / >是英国的国家超级计算机服务的最新版本。少量的计算时间是英国学者免费,但对于大型项目,他们必须竞标。< / p > < p >这是罕见的模拟要求的弓箭手的规模或ARCHER2;通常取决于正在运行的模型,一个部门或机构系统的几个节点可能是足够的,特别是如果一个并不匆忙。< / p > < h2 >建筑规范对不同系统< / h2 > < p >只要精心编写的代码,这并不像听起来那么难。FORTRAN标准化相当不错(尽管有些代码需要使用一个特定的编译器),和MPI——太——尽管其不同的实现。和大多数现代超级计算机是大规模并行机器的实际计算节点标准x64服务器,使用cpu(如英特尔工作站。所以你可以做很多开发桌面PC之前尝试构建它大而昂贵的地方。不同系统之间最大的区别往往在于水路(高速、低延迟网络节点之间),但通常系统管理员将优化的MPI安装这个系统,它提供给用户,所以进程间的所有细节和抽象的节点间通信。< / p > < h2 >更改或改进< / h2 > < p >你已经发现了,对大多数人来说,关键是要提高一个小方面,如特定parametrisation。 Once somebody has the standard code working, then if it is well written in a maintainable manner (not a given in the scientific world) then it is relatively straightforward for them to modify one aspect and test it. The hardest thing often is obtaining measurements or other data against which to validate the new version.

//www.hoelymoley.com/questions/22826/-/22845 # 22845 3 回答Deditos学者如何/机构运行大型气候模拟的计算挑战? Deditos //www.hoelymoley.com/users/106 2021 - 09 - 19 - t17:21:42z 2021 - 09 - 19 - t17:21:42z < p >另一个英国的角度补充半日西蒙的答案(这也反映出我的经验)。< / p > < p >英国研究社区是由一个家庭的模型统称为统一模型。这些所有的代码由英国国家天气和气候模拟中心,英国气象局和使用许可下免费的学者。许可给学者访问源代码存储库模型和实验设置共享在密苏里州和学术界。西蒙提到ARCHER2,共享所有学科的学者,但英国气象局还提供< a href = " https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/approach/collaboration/jwcrp/monsoon-hpc " rel = " nofollow noreferrer " >季风< / >专为大气建模与学术团体的合作。< / p > < p >因为莫是一个运营中心预测,他们把< em > < / em >的精力确保代码和支持软件高效、可靠地运行,那么学者访问很硬。但是学术方面也有< a href = " https://cms-helpdesk.ncas.ac。英国nofollow noreferrer“rel = > NCAS-CMS < / >,他们的工作是确保模型适用于机器像ARCHER2整个社区。总之有水平的国家支持这个模型在这些机器上,当我发送一个学生的培训课程模型可以运行气候模拟硬件在30分钟内到达。< / p > < blockquote > < p > WRF有150万行代码。所以调试或定制不同的集群似乎很艰难的< / p > < /引用> < p >嗯,嗯有大约130万行代码,我估计我知道15%的代码很好(主要是特定的科学领域),其余的几乎没有。当我遇到错误他们总是因为我刚刚改变了之类的领域密切相关的代码我知道。 When bugs lead into other parts of the model, it’s usually best to go and ask someone who knows about those areas rather than digging too hard yourself.

Writing and running an individual component model or "parameterization" model for one of these larger models seems manageable... But then how can that same person test his/her model inside of one of the larger climate models?

Yes, new parameterizations are often developed separately from the full climate model before being added to it. But the longer a parameterization is developed in isolation the more likely it is that it will be conceptually or technically incompatible with the full model. The trick is knowing early on that you want to couple it into the larger model later and to design your parameterization accordingly. In my experience, however modular we aspire to make these models, it can still be quite a pain to couple in parameterization code that’s had a well-established, independent life outside of the climate model. In general though, this is where the shared code repositories and an active community are really useful.

Since a lot of that model code is written in fortran, that just exacerbates the portability problem since there is less ability to "abstract" away some of this configuration in objects.

I remember years ago, as a student, a computer scientist friend of mine avoided doing an industry placement at a climate modelling center because he had such a low opinion of their software. "It's so basic and boring", he said, "They just use Fortran!" But those same things that are off-putting to a computing student are beneficial to the largely self-taught programmers (i.e., physical scientists) who are working with these models. Fortran is a fairly straightforward and safe language to learn and use, with relatively few concepts and gotchas. Compare that with OOP paradigms, which are hard to use well without significant training.

But those are more comments on the portability of the programmers than of the programs. As Simon mentions, the difficult bits of getting a climate model running on new hardware (big or small) tend to be handled by the support staff of that hardware rather than the academic researchers themselves.

Baidu
map