Skip to content
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

CI: Test New v. Legacy BTD in BTD_ReducedSliceDiag #3371

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Sep 21, 2022

Conversation

EZoni
Copy link
Member

@EZoni EZoni commented Sep 7, 2022

Keep adding more CI coverage of the new BTD, see #3300. Similar to #3327.

Main changes:

  • Add checksums for the CI test BTD_ReducedSliceDiag, evaluated on the BTD plotfile data

To-do:

Note:
We cannot compare legacy BTD data with new BTD data (either plotfile or openPMD), because the array shapes are different (see comment below). As far as I understood from @RTSandberg, this is a known discrepancy and it is not expected to be taken care of any time soon.

@EZoni EZoni added component: tests Tests and CI component: diagnostics all types of outputs labels Sep 7, 2022
@EZoni
Copy link
Member Author

EZoni commented Sep 9, 2022

@RevathiJambunathan

When I compare the legacy BTD output with the new BTD output in the Python analysis (see files changed in this PR), I get Ez arrays of different shapes:

  • legacy BTD: (32, 32, 49)
  • new BTD (plotfile): (32, 32, 64)
  • new BTD (openPMD): (32, 32, 64)

Note that the new BTD array with plotfile and openPMD formats agree with each other up to machine precision, so that's consistent. I cannot yet compare those with the legacy array because of the mismatch in the shapes.

Do you have any hints on where the 49 cells in the third dimension could be coming from for the legacy output in this case? Note that the legacy array with shape (32, 32, 49) is loaded in the Python analysis as follows:

snapshot = './lab_frame_data/snapshots/snapshot00003'
header   = './lab_frame_data/snapshots/Header'
allrd, info = read_raw_data.read_lab_snapshot(snapshot, header)
Ez_legacy = allrd['Ez']

@EZoni EZoni changed the title [WIP] CI: Test New BTD in BTD_ReducedSliceDiag [WIP] CI: Test New v. Legacy BTD in BTD_ReducedSliceDiag Sep 9, 2022
@EZoni EZoni requested a review from RTSandberg September 14, 2022 21:23
@EZoni EZoni changed the title [WIP] CI: Test New v. Legacy BTD in BTD_ReducedSliceDiag CI: Test New v. Legacy BTD in BTD_ReducedSliceDiag Sep 14, 2022
Copy link
Member

@RTSandberg RTSandberg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for working on these tests! They look good to me

@EZoni EZoni changed the title CI: Test New v. Legacy BTD in BTD_ReducedSliceDiag [WIP] CI: Test New v. Legacy BTD in BTD_ReducedSliceDiag Sep 19, 2022
@EZoni EZoni changed the title [WIP] CI: Test New v. Legacy BTD in BTD_ReducedSliceDiag CI: Test New v. Legacy BTD in BTD_ReducedSliceDiag Sep 21, 2022
@RemiLehe RemiLehe merged commit 90b72e8 into ECP-WarpX:development Sep 21, 2022
dpgrote pushed a commit to dpgrote/WarpX that referenced this pull request Nov 22, 2022
* CI: Test New BTD in `BTD_ReducedSliceDiag`

* Compare Legacy BTD vs. New BTD

* Fix Bug in Loading of openPMD Array Data

* Fix CI Analysis
@EZoni EZoni deleted the reduced_slice_btd_test branch September 19, 2024 16:11
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
component: diagnostics all types of outputs component: tests Tests and CI
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants