The 2.5 way of absorption lookup table calculations is being redesigned.
For now you need to manually define the agendas as you do. Add lines will
be removed, at some point, from the xsec code. The reason it's deprecated
is that in normal calculations you should be putting the line calculations
into the propagation matrix agenda. Lookup calculations are special here
since they just do partial calculations.
//Richard
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021, 08:30 Patrick Eriksson <patrick.eriks...@chalmers.se>
wrote:
> Hi again,
>
> Seems that I have found the reason to some of the failing tests "the
> hard way". After spending time on some other failing calculations, I
> have figured out that the default in ARTS gives absorption lookup-tables
> that miss all lines. For example, TestOdinSMR_1D uses
>
> Copy(abs_xsec_agenda, abs_xsec_agenda__noCIA)
>
> This agenda is defined as
>
> AgendaSet( abs_xsec_agenda__noCIA ){
> abs_xsec_per_speciesInit
> abs_xsec_per_speciesAddConts
> }
>
> No inclusion of lines! Another Odin/SMR test uses
>
> AgendaSet( abs_xsec_agenda ) {
> abs_xsec_per_speciesInit
> abs_xsec_per_speciesAddConts
> abs_xsec_per_speciesAddLines
> }
>
> and this works. Both tests generates abs tables.
>
> I get a message that abs_xsec_per_speciesAddLines is deprecated. But why
> removed from the defaults for abs_xsec_agenda before the alternative is
> in place?
>
> Anyhow, how shall abs_xsec_agenda be defined to get correct abs tables
> in v2.5?
>
> Bye,
>
> Patrick
>
>
>
>
>
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> Subject: Failing tests
> Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2021 17:55:33 +0200
> From: Patrick Eriksson <patrick.eriks...@chalmers.se>
> To: ARTS Development List <arts_dev.mi@lists.uni-hamburg.de>
>
> Hi all,
>
> I have spent some time on trying to figure out how the changes in my
> branch could have created some failing tests. But just run make
> check-all with master and the same tests failed also there, so there
> seem to be older issues.
>
> The failed tests listed below. These issues under control? Noticed that
> some tests demand an accuracy of 2nK! The deviation was 2.5 mK, which
> can be OK. On the other hand, there were also tests failing with
> deviations of 30-100 K.
>
> Bye,
>
> Patrick
>
>
>
> The following tests FAILED:
> 42 - arts.ctlfile.slow.artscomponents.clearsky.TestBatch (Failed)
> 43 - python.arts.ctlfile.slow.artscomponents.clearsky.TestBatch
> (Failed)
> 152 - arts.ctlfile.slow.instruments.odinsmr.TestOdinSMR_1D (Failed)
> 153 - python.arts.ctlfile.slow.instruments.odinsmr.TestOdinSMR_1D
> (Failed)
> 156 - arts.ctlfile.slow.instruments.hirs.TestHIRS_fast (Failed)
> 157 - python.arts.ctlfile.slow.instruments.hirs.TestHIRS_fast
> (Failed)
> 158 - arts.ctlfile.slow.instruments.metmm.TestMetMM (Failed)
> 159 - python.arts.ctlfile.slow.instruments.metmm.TestMetMM (Failed)
> 180 -
> arts.ctlfile.xmldata.artscomponents.arts-xml-data.TestPlanetIsoRatios
> (Failed)
> 181 -
> python.arts.ctlfile.xmldata.artscomponents.arts-xml-data.TestPlanetIsoRatios
>
> (Failed)
> 184 - arts.ctlfile.xmldata.artscomponents.cia.TestRTwithCIA
> (Failed)
> 185 - python.arts.ctlfile.xmldata.artscomponents.cia.TestRTwithCIA
> (Failed)
> 232 - arts.pyarts.pytest (Failed)
>
>
>
>
>
