[Yt-dev] HaloProfiler vs. enzo_anyl

Thu Apr 14 11:26:14 PDT 2011

Hi Britton,

On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 11:57 AM, Britton Smith <brittonsmith at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Matt,
>
> Thanks for looking into this.
>
> I agree with your assessment of the cooling time issue, that the order
> should be 3, 2, 1 here.  The number of ways that cooling can be done in Enzo
> alone is growing large enough that reconstructing all of that on our own in
> YT will be a major pain, and require updates every time someone modifies
> what is done in Enzo.  That last part I definitely want to avoid.  Option 2
> is something that would be beneficial for many things, but is probably  a
> little ways off.  For now, I think it's fine to check whether the
> OutputCoolingTime parameter is set and profile that field based on that.
>
> When you you would like 2D profiles of every field, I'm not sure what you
> mean.  By default, we're doing radial profiles of halos.  Would we have
> default x and y fields for the 2D profiles?  If so, I guess maybe density
> and temperature.

Oh, I was thinking that we'd have radial profiles and radial phase
plots, so that you could over plot.  Often it's very useful to have a
1D of, say, Radius and Temperature, and a 2D of Radius, Temperature,
(unweighted) CellMassMSun, and plot the first on the second.  Then you
can see the mass distribution along with the average values.

>
> Everything else you said I like a lot.
>
> Britton
>
> On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 11:45 AM, Matthew Turk <matthewturk at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I had an opportunity to speak yesterday with Greg Bryan (who's not
>> subscribed to this list) and independent of this thread, he brought up
>> replacing enzo_anyl with yt.  The one thing that I think we may be
>> missing is the cooling time.  To get the cooling time in yt we have
>> three options:
>>
>> 1) Re-calculate from scratch, using all the items in the parameter
>> file that govern the cooling time.  This will also allow it to work
>> for non-Enzo simulation outputs.
>> 2) Wrap the Enzo cooling time routines.  This will require utilizing
>> fortran/C interop, possibly with f2py.  It also has a lot of moving
>> parts.  (These would be solved if some day there was some agreement on
>> microphysical solver APIs.)  This would work with non-Enzo datasets.
>> 3) Mandate that if you want the cooling time in your profiles, you run
>> with OutputCoolingTime=1 in Enzo.  This would not work with non-Enzo
>> datasets, unless they too had an option to output the local cooling
>> time in every cell.
>>
>> I think #3 is the fastest time to solution, and certainly the option
>> that is the least error prone.  (The list above, it seems to me, is
>> actually in order of increasing reliability.)
>>
>> The remaining items that we would need to accomplish to make
>> HaloProfiler a generalized replacement for enzo_anyl, I believe, are
>> either implementing the remaining fields (there may be a handful) and
>> actually coming up with a list of all the fields to profile.  Ideally
>> I think we should calculate 1- and 2-D profiles for every field, and
>> an HDF5 file with all of the profiles in it.  The final output could
>> then *additionally* include image plots of phase plots of
>> mass-distribution with the average 1D profile overplotted.  And
>> perhaps projections.  If we did all this, then we could not only aim
>> to replicate functionality, but to enhance it.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Matt
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 1:50 PM, Britton Smith <brittonsmith at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi Rick, Cameron, everyone,
>> >
>> > Cameron is correct.  I'm not suggesting any changes to Enzo.
>> >
>> > Back before yt, enzo_anyl was used to make radial profiles of halos.  My
>> > understanding is that it only works in serial and that it is relatively
>> > difficult, or at least not straightforward, to add new fields for radial
>> > profiles.
>> >
>> > The HaloProfiler tool in yt makes radial profiles in the same way, only
>> > it
>> > take user input to decide on what fields to profile.  It also can run in
>> > parallel and do fixed resolution projections around each halo.
>> > Personally,
>> > I think this makes using the HaloProfiler a better choice moving
>> > forward.
>> > However, I have heard suggestions that the HaloProfiler lacks some
>> > functionality of enzo_anyl, preventing it from being a true
>> > replacement.  I
>> > don't think enzo_anyl should be gotten rid of if people are still using
>> > it.
>> > I just want to know what's missing so people who would like to use yt
>> > for
>> > their enzo_anyl needs don't feel like they are losing functionality by
>> > switching.
>> >
>> > Britton
>> >
>> > On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 1:36 PM, Cameron Hummels
>> > <chummels at astro.columbia.edu> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Rick,
>> >>
>> >> I don't think he's suggesting we change enzo.  I think he simply wants
>> >> to know what functionality is lacking from yt's haloprofiler that
>> >> enzoanyl currently has.  That said, I think when we get haloprofiler
>> >> working up to spec with enzoanyl's capabilities, we should announce it
>> >> to the enzo list, so people who use enzoanyl (there aren't many of us)
>> >> will know that there is a better supported alternative in yt.
>> >>
>> >> Cameron
>> >>
>> >> On 04/12/2011 12:18 PM, Rick Wagner wrote:
>> >> > Hi Britton,
>> >> >
>> >> > On Apr 12, 2011, at 9:04 AM, Britton Smith wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Hey everyone,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> There is a fair amount of discussion about the HaloProfiler being a
>> >> >> replacement for enzo_anyl.  I would definitely like to see this
>> >> >> become
>> >> >> official, since it seems to be keeping a number of people from
>> >> >> making the
>> >> >> switch to YT.  Can somebody outline the things that enzo_anyl does
>> >> >> that the
>> >> >> HaloProfiler cannot?  I have been under the impression that there
>> >> >> wasn't
>> >> >> anything, but I haven't used enzo_anyl in quite a while.
>> >> > I think that the HaloProfiler could easily be wrapped to look at act
>> >> > just like enzo_anyl, which makes this an attractive choice. But, I
>> >> > would
>> >> > post this question also the enzo-dev mailing list, since you're
>> >> > asking about
>> >> > changing Enzo, not YT.
>> >> >
>> >> > --Rick
>> >> >
>> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >> > Yt-dev mailing list
>> >> > Yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
>> >> > http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Cameron Hummels
>> >> PhD Candidate, Astronomy Department of Columbia University
>> >> Public Outreach Director, Astronomy Department of Columbia University
>> >> NASA IYA New York State Student Ambassador
>> >> http://outreach.astro.columbia.edu
>> >> PGP: 0x06F886E3
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Yt-dev mailing list
>> >> Yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
>> >> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Yt-dev mailing list
>> > Yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
>> > http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>> >
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> Yt-dev mailing list
>> Yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
>> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Yt-dev mailing list
> Yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>
>