-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 283
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
Extend conservative regridding to additional dimensions (Previously: Add conservative interpolation scheme) #5035
Comments
Thanks @stephenworsley . This greatly captures the need to add conservative, length-weighted interpolation. Fields that require this are:
|
@pp-mo notes that anything involving bounds probably shouldn't be called 'interpolation'. |
@SciTools/iris-devs please comment with your most controversial opinions! Open season! |
Are you thinking 1D, e.g. different heights, full 3D, different 2D, e.g. transects, or something else entirely? Perhaps we can add one or two concrete examples with phenomenon, source grid, and target grid. |
@zklaus I was thinking of 1D interpolation though I could imagine there being a also case for 3D interpolation for something like altitude which varies over latitude/longitude. The example I had in mind was of a 1D height coordinate with bounds (representing other stagger points in an Arakawa grid). Interpolating from one height coordinate to another would involve each target point representing the interval between its bounds, the value at that point would be an average of all the values associated with source intervals which overlap with that target interval. This would be a weighted average based on the proportion of overlap. Doing this with 3D coords would be more complicated and would require that the bounds were of shape |
What are you planning in terms of computational performance? In the past, I've been advised by @bjlittle to avoid the |
@bouweandela I'm in the process of improving the regridding code as part of #4754, you'll be pleased to learn I've already improved the performance of the |
@SciTools/peloton @trexfeathers suggested that this has been seen as sort-of blocked by the above comment |
@pp-mo my view is that there basically is no agreed, distinctive terminology to describe what "interpolation" + "regridding" should be and the difference/commonalities between them. Specifically, I think that in Iris ...
|
Step One: Proof of concept code |
✨ Feature Request
Rather than providing conservative regridding via the interpolate method, it may make more sense to extend regridding directly by allowing regridding to work on non-horizontal coordinates.
Motivation
The way data is located on a cell, or the type of data it represents, can mean that different interpolation methods are more proper. If the data represents the measurement at a point then a linear method is likely to be more appropriate, but if it represents the average of some quantity between some bounds then a conservative method which uses these bounds may be more appropriate.
Additional context
Click to expand this section...
Tasks
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: