Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Climate Prediction.NET

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Climate Prediction.NET

    EDIT: when I say "on mass" in the poll, of course I mean "en masse"

    Climate Prediction.NET

    These guys are launching a new distributed computing project today, modelling climate change.

    We have already had a short thread about this in the Distributed@MURC forum here.

    I thought I'd post it in the Lounge as I know (a) not all of us venture into the dist@MURC forum, and that (b) most of the existing projects don't appeal to some.

    This is a project run by it seems Oxford Uni, the Open University, and the UK Met Office.

    Brief blurb:

    Climate models predict significant changes to the Earth's climate in the coming century. But there is a huge range in what they predict - how should we deal with this uncertainty? If they are over-estimating the speed and scale of climate change, we may end up panicking unnecessarily and investing huge amounts of money trying to avert a problem which doesn't turn out to be as serious as the models suggested. Alternatively, if the models are under-estimating the change, we will end up doing too little, too late in the mistaken belief that the changes will be manageably small and gradual.

    To cope with this problem we need to evaluate our confidence in the predictions from climate models. In other words we need to quantify the uncertainty in these predictions. By participating in the experiment, you can help us to do this in a way that would not otherwise be possible.

    Even with the incredible speed of today's supercomputers, climate models have to include the effects of small-scale physical processes (such as clouds) through simplifications (parameterizations). There is a range of uncertainty in the precise values of many of the parameters used - we do not know precisely what value is most realistic. Sometimes this range can be an order of magnitude! This means that any single forecast represents only one of many possible ways the climate could develop.

    How can we assess and reduce this uncertainty?

    There are two complementary approaches to this problem:
    Improve the parameterizations while narrowing the range of uncertainty in the parameters. This is a continuous process and requires:
    Improving the models, using the latest supercomputers as they become available.
    Gathering more and more (mainly satellite) data on a wide range of atmospheric variables (such as wind speed, cloud cover, temperature.....).
    Carry out large numbers of model runs in which the parameters are varied within their current range of uncertainty. Reject those which fail to model past climate successfully and use the remainder to study future climate.
    The second scenario is the climateprediction.net approach. Our intention is to run hundreds of thousands of state-of-the-art climate models with slightly different physics in order to represent the whole range of uncertainties in all the parameterizations. This technique, known as ensemble forecasting, requires an enormous amount of computing power, far beyond the currently available resources of cutting-edge supercomputers. The only practical solution is to appeal to distributed computing which combines the power of thousands of ordinary computers, each computer tackling one small but key part of the global problem.
    I'd be interested in your (particularly Brian's actually) views on this project - I have moved one machine over myself to have a go, and whilst there is no facility to put team statistics together yet, the feature is apparently on the way, and when it's there it would be nice to have a Matroxusers team .

    The client is actually one of the nicest and most "modern" looking I have seen for a distributed project, and the team seems very professional. Windows only for now, although a Linux client is on the way I think.

    Regards

    Gnep
    25
    Yes, definitely at least 1 computer for at least some of the time
    0%
    6
    If there is a strong consensus for MURCers to move on mass to this project and get a decent team together, I will join.
    0%
    6
    I am going to wait and see how the project gets going before I commit
    0%
    1
    No, I will stick with my existing distributed project(s)
    0%
    6
    Nope. I don't do distributed stuff because of juice/connection/noise/hassle.
    0%
    6
    DM says: Crunch with Matrox Users@ClimatePrediction.net

  • #2
    No for me.

    I'm determined to try and pass High_Jumbllama in DF, even if it's just for a brief period of time

    Comment


    • #3
      Fair enough I am resigned to staying at or around 10th in DF (still left the other machine running on that one)...

      Relevant BBC article here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3100024.stm

      Note to Mods: Please let this thread stay in the Lounge for a bit of exposure for a little while and then feel free to move it over to D@M

      Cheers

      G
      DM says: Crunch with Matrox Users@ClimatePrediction.net

      Comment


      • #4
        GNEP

        Although the cause is good, my experience of distributed computing has been rather negative. I participated for several months with the cancer-attacking molecule one and found it caused me more hassle than anything.

        I'm also a little reticent about security issues whereby three remote organisations will have two-way access to my computer, with open ports. I have little doubt of the sincerity of it all, but a zealous student may just be able to cause me harm by getting past my firewall a little too easily.

        I therefore will not participate for the moment.

        FYI, I suggested to the IPCC a similar idea about two years ago and was shot down in flames for my trouble :-)
        Brian (the devil incarnate)

        Comment


        • #5
          Brian,

          Thanks for your comments.

          The server-link side of things is being handled by the Oxford University Computing Services guys (OUCS), and in my experience over the last 8 or 9 years dealing with them when I've had to, I don't think that there should be any (more than usual) security worries. They are highly professional people, if at times a little, er, "old-fashioned" in some of their approaches. (You can never quite shake the feeling that over half of them pine for the days of punch cards ).

          There are plenty of opportunities that present themselves for distributed computing - climate modelling I have thought for a long time is a prime candidate - so no surprise that you have proposed these ideas before! Personally, working at Shell, I have mentioned the idea of building some sort of seismic-data modelling distributed client purely for use on the 100-150k+ machines on the internal (secure) network - no interest so far - we even have standard screensavers that we cannot change (even the timeout) already! The company does invest heavily in linux-based clustered supercomputers for some of the seismic modelling though that is somewhat removed from my own areas of work....

          G
          DM says: Crunch with Matrox Users@ClimatePrediction.net

          Comment


          • #6
            I loaded it up, seems cool. Don't forget an important thing:

            They request that you don't join unless you really intend to let the model finish. Since everyone runs a slightly different model they need to know if you decide to quit running the client so that they can give someone else that specific model.
            Last edited by Jon P. Inghram; 12 September 2003, 18:14.

            Comment


            • #7
              Oh yeah. Well said Jon. Forgot to add that little nugget
              DM says: Crunch with Matrox Users@ClimatePrediction.net

              Comment


              • #8
                If there is a strong consensus for MURCers to move on mass to this project and get a decent team together, I will join.

                Comment


                • #9
                  For stats freaks, here is what my own stats look like at the moment:<table><tr><td colspan=2>Current Totals</td></tr>
                  <tr><td>Active Machine Count</td><td>1</td></tr>
                  <tr><td>Total CPU Days</td><td>2.582</td></tr>
                  <tr><td>Total Petacycles (10^15)</td><td>.368</td></tr>
                  <tr><td>Last Phase/Timestep Reported</td><td>1 : 54150</td></tr>
                  <tr><td>Allocated Total Runs</td><td>1</td></tr>
                  <tr><td>Reported Total Runs</td><td>0</td></tr>
                  <tr><td>Latest Date/Time Reported (GMT)</td><td>17-Sep-03 09:51:17</td></tr>
                  <tr><td>CPDN User Since:</td><td>11-Sep-03 23:18:16</td></tr>
                  <tr><td colspan=2>&nbsp;</td></tr>
                  <tr><td colspan=2>Current Machines and Runs</td></tr>
                  <tr><td>Machine Name</td><td>NEPTUNE</td></tr>
                  <tr><td>Total CPU Days</td><td>2.582</td></tr>
                  <tr><td>Total Petacycles</td><td>.368</td></tr>
                  <tr><td>Last Phase/Timestep Reported</td><td>1 : 54150</td></tr>
                  <tr><td>Allocated Total Runs</td><td>1</td></tr>
                  <tr><td>Reported Total Runs</td><td>0</td></tr>
                  <tr><td>Latest Date/Time Reported (GMT)</td><td>17-Sep-03 09:51:17</td></tr></table>

                  Grouping/comparing/teams etc are on the way very soon apparently.
                  Last edited by GNEP; 17 September 2003, 05:43.
                  DM says: Crunch with Matrox Users@ClimatePrediction.net

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    We now have the ability to have Groups...

                    So I've added a "Matroxusers" Group - please feel free to join if you are crunching on this project - go to "edit your profile" on the user stats pages and add "Matroxusers" as your group

                    Happy climate-ing folks
                    DM says: Crunch with Matrox Users@ClimatePrediction.net

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Joined.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X