Allow each model run to have a different experiment ID #332

NParsonsMO · 2026-01-13T16:20:40Z

Closes #263 .

PR creation checklist for the developer

Has <issue_number> above ☝️ been replaced with the issue number?
Has main been selected as the base branch?
Does the feature branch name follow the format <issue_number>_<short_description_of_feature>?
Does the text of the PR title exactly match with the text (not including the issue number) of the issue title?
Have appropriate reviewers been added to the PR (once it is ready for review)?
Has the PR been assigned to the developer(s)?
Have the same labels as on the issue (except for the good first issue label) been added to the PR?
Has the Climate Model Evaluation Workflow (CMEW) project been added to the PR?
Has the appropriate milestone been added to the PR?

Definition of Done for the developer

Does the change in this PR address the above issue / have all acceptance criteria been met?
Does the change in this PR follow the requirements in the wiki: Developer Guide (including copyrights)?
Have new tests related to the change been added?
Do all the GitHub workflow checks pass?
Do all the tests run locally and pass? (Note: the tests are not run by the GitHub workflow, see wiki: Run the tests locally)
Has the API documentation (e.g. docstrings in Python modules) related to the change been updated appropriately?
Has the user documentation (i.e. everything in the doc directory) related to the change been updated appropriately, including the Quick Start section?
Do the HTML pages render correctly? (See wiki: Build the documentation locally)

PR creation checklist for the reviewer

Has <issue_number> above ☝️ been replaced with the issue number?
Has main been selected as the base branch?
Does the feature branch name follow the format <issue_number>_<short_description_of_feature>?
Does the text of the PR title exactly match with the text (not including the issue number) of the issue title?
Have appropriate reviewers been added to the PR (once it is ready for review)?
Has the PR been assigned to the developer(s)?
Have the same labels as on the issue (except for the good first issue label) been added to the PR?
Has the Climate Model Evaluation Workflow (CMEW) project been added to the PR?
Has the appropriate milestone been added to the PR?

Definition of Done for the reviewer

Does the change in this PR address the above issue / have all acceptance criteria been met?
Does the change in this PR follow the requirements in the wiki: Developer Guide (including copyrights)?
Have new tests related to the change been added? N/A
Do all the GitHub workflow checks pass?
Do all the tests run locally and pass? (Note: the tests are not run by the GitHub workflow, see wiki: Run the tests locally)
Has the API documentation (e.g. docstrings in Python modules) related to the change been updated appropriately? N/A
Has the user documentation (i.e. everything in the doc directory) related to the change been updated appropriately, including the Quick Start section? N/A
Do the HTML pages render correctly? (See wiki: Build the documentation locally)

NParsonsMO · 2026-01-13T16:23:45Z

Commit 80ab7bb is not actually to do with this issue, I wrote SUITE_ID and REF_SUITE_ID into this section in PR #299 https://github.com/MetOffice/CMEW/pull/299/changes, but they were already inherited as part of MODEL_RUNS.

NParsonsMO · 2026-01-13T16:29:01Z

CMEW/flow.cylc

mo-nikosbaltas

All looks good. Run successful including tests.
However the text of the PR title does not match with the text of the issue.

NParsonsMO · 2026-01-22T08:39:37Z

All looks good. Run successful including tests. However the text of the PR title does not match with the text of the issue.

I am not spotting the difference (admittedly pre coffee)...

mo-nikosbaltas · 2026-01-22T08:45:42Z

It was me being careless. It is all ok.

mo-nikosbaltas

It is all good.

ehogan

Thanks @NParsonsMO! 🥳

CMEW/app/configure_for/bin/update_recipe_file.py

ehogan · 2026-01-22T17:52:40Z

CMEW/meta/rose-meta.conf

    =empty string.
 type=quoted

+[template variables=EXP_TYPE]


I'm wondering whether we should use EXPERIMENT_ID to align with the CMIP6 Controlled Vocabularies? 🤔

I'm happy to, it's just longer (especially REF_EXPERIMENT_ID) - is that OK?

CMEW/meta/rose-meta.conf

ehogan · 2026-01-22T17:55:38Z

CMEW/meta/rose-meta.conf

+compulsory=true
+description=The experiment type used by the evaluation run.
+sort-key=05
+values="amip","historical","piControl","rcp85","abrupt4xCO2"


There are many more experiment IDs than listed here. Should CMEW allow more experiment IDs than those listed here? 🤔

It's a question that I meant to ask then forgot!

These were all the ones I could find currently in ESMValTool, but we can add more or make it freeform?

Co-authored-by: Emma Hogan <ehogan@users.noreply.github.com>

NParsonsMO added 4 commits January 13, 2026 15:48

Adding two new variables

697a68c

Amending one value so they are different

a4b514c

Adding to CDDS request

5ce150d

Removing duplicated environment variable from other PR

80ab7bb

NParsonsMO linked an issue Jan 13, 2026 that may be closed by this pull request

Allow each model run to have a different experiment ID #263

Open

NParsonsMO self-assigned this Jan 13, 2026

Copyrights

994c31a

Tests and documentation

a24befb

NParsonsMO commented Jan 13, 2026

View reviewed changes

CMEW/flow.cylc Show resolved Hide resolved

NParsonsMO changed the title ~~263 different experiment id per model run~~ Allow each model run to have a different experiment ID Jan 13, 2026

NParsonsMO added configure Anything related to configuration recipe Anything related to ESMValTool labels Jan 13, 2026

NParsonsMO added this to the v0.2.0 (multiple model runs) milestone Jan 13, 2026

NParsonsMO marked this pull request as ready for review January 13, 2026 16:43

mo-nikosbaltas self-requested a review January 14, 2026 10:28

NParsonsMO mentioned this pull request Jan 21, 2026

Minimise duplication of the CDDS default request items #349

Open

34 tasks

mo-nikosbaltas reviewed Jan 21, 2026

View reviewed changes

mo-nikosbaltas previously approved these changes Jan 22, 2026

View reviewed changes

Merge branch 'main' into 263-different-experiment-id-per-model-run

994cf98

NParsonsMO dismissed mo-nikosbaltas’s stale review via 994cf98 January 22, 2026 13:24

NParsonsMO requested a review from mo-nikosbaltas January 22, 2026 16:11

mo-nikosbaltas previously approved these changes Jan 22, 2026

View reviewed changes

ehogan requested changes Jan 22, 2026

View reviewed changes

NParsonsMO dismissed mo-nikosbaltas’s stale review via c703a93 January 23, 2026 08:55

NParsonsMO and others added 2 commits January 23, 2026 08:55

Accepting suggestion

c703a93

Co-authored-by: Emma Hogan <ehogan@users.noreply.github.com>

Accepting suggestion

1e33a8e

Co-authored-by: Emma Hogan <ehogan@users.noreply.github.com>

Allow each model run to have a different experiment ID #332

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Allow each model run to have a different experiment ID #332

Uh oh!

Conversation

NParsonsMO commented Jan 13, 2026 • edited by mo-nikosbaltas Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

PR creation checklist for the developer

Definition of Done for the developer

PR creation checklist for the reviewer

Definition of Done for the reviewer

Uh oh!

NParsonsMO commented Jan 13, 2026

Uh oh!

NParsonsMO commented Jan 13, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mo-nikosbaltas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

NParsonsMO commented Jan 22, 2026

Uh oh!

mo-nikosbaltas commented Jan 22, 2026

Uh oh!

mo-nikosbaltas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ehogan left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

ehogan Jan 22, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

NParsonsMO Jan 23, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

ehogan Jan 22, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

NParsonsMO Jan 23, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

NParsonsMO commented Jan 13, 2026 •

edited by mo-nikosbaltas

Loading