I built the latest version in a linux VM (two, actually, Debian 12.6.1 and Xubuntu 24.04, the former running Python 3.11 and the latter Python 3.13) without any difficulty using conda and pip, and ran the tutorial model as a check. I found a few minor bugs, a couple of differences in the results that I'm not sure are significant or not, and one thing that is giving me fits when I read in a model configuration from a file. The results from both builds are identical.
Minor bugs:
-
Snapshot metadata files are not written to the snapshots subdirectory of the model directory; they're written to the model directory itself. The MOST_SNAP files are written to the correct subdirectory.
-
When reading a model from a config file, model.keplerian ALWAYS gets set to true, even when it's specifically set to false in the .cfg file.
-
Getting the energy balance using gethistory (e.g., toi700d.gethistory(key="ntr") returns a list with twice as many elements as it should have, with all the odd elements set to 0. Thus, e.g., the 10-year TOI 700d model I ran returns 20 elements.
This is the completely perplexing one:
Running the TOI 700d model from a config file (which I output after first specifying the model via explicit configure, just as in the tutorial) produces results in which the substellar point is apparently at a longitude ~ 100 degrees rather than 180. This is true even if I read in the model parameters from a file and then set every parameter as shown in the tutorial before running the model,
startemp=3480.0, flux=1167.0,
eccentricity=0.,obliquity=0.,fixedorbit=True,
synchronous=True,rotationperiod=37.426,
radius=1.19,gravity=11.9,aquaplanet=True,
pN2=1.47*(1-360e-6),pCO2=1.47*360e-6,ozone=False,
timestep=30.0,snapshots=720,physicsfilter="gp|exp|sp"
plus setting toi700d.keplerian=false and toi700d.substellarlongitude=180. Writing the configuration file from this model produces one that is identical to that written after setting all the model parameters with model.configure rather than reading them from a config file. This is apparent in both the surface temperature plot and the streamline plot: it looks just like a tidally-locked TOI 700d, only with the substellar longitude set to about 100 instead of 180. Here's the resulting surface temperature plot:
I am completely at a loss to explain this.
-
Minor computational differences: I'm not sure if any of these are significant except maybe for the vertical winds. Running the same TOI 700d model described in the tutorial:
a) the amplitude of the vertical winds is nearly two orders of magnitude smaller than what is shown on the tutorial page, although the form of the
longitude-pressure distribution appears to be identical. (The zonal winds match the tutorial results perfectly.)
b) The streamlines around the substellar point are not as well-organized as those shown on the tutorial page.
c) The energy-balance evolution (once corrected for issue 3 above) is somewhat different from the tutorial plot, although it has the same overall behavior.
In contrast to these three, the T-P and Q-P results are indistinguishable from the tutorial page results.
I built the latest version in a linux VM (two, actually, Debian 12.6.1 and Xubuntu 24.04, the former running Python 3.11 and the latter Python 3.13) without any difficulty using conda and pip, and ran the tutorial model as a check. I found a few minor bugs, a couple of differences in the results that I'm not sure are significant or not, and one thing that is giving me fits when I read in a model configuration from a file. The results from both builds are identical.
Minor bugs:
Snapshot metadata files are not written to the snapshots subdirectory of the model directory; they're written to the model directory itself. The MOST_SNAP files are written to the correct subdirectory.
When reading a model from a config file, model.keplerian ALWAYS gets set to true, even when it's specifically set to false in the .cfg file.
Getting the energy balance using gethistory (e.g., toi700d.gethistory(key="ntr") returns a list with twice as many elements as it should have, with all the odd elements set to 0. Thus, e.g., the 10-year TOI 700d model I ran returns 20 elements.
This is the completely perplexing one:
Running the TOI 700d model from a config file (which I output after first specifying the model via explicit configure, just as in the tutorial) produces results in which the substellar point is apparently at a longitude ~ 100 degrees rather than 180. This is true even if I read in the model parameters from a file and then set every parameter as shown in the tutorial before running the model,
plus setting toi700d.keplerian=false and toi700d.substellarlongitude=180. Writing the configuration file from this model produces one that is identical to that written after setting all the model parameters with model.configure rather than reading them from a config file. This is apparent in both the surface temperature plot and the streamline plot: it looks just like a tidally-locked TOI 700d, only with the substellar longitude set to about 100 instead of 180. Here's the resulting surface temperature plot:
I am completely at a loss to explain this.
Minor computational differences: I'm not sure if any of these are significant except maybe for the vertical winds. Running the same TOI 700d model described in the tutorial:
a) the amplitude of the vertical winds is nearly two orders of magnitude smaller than what is shown on the tutorial page, although the form of the
longitude-pressure distribution appears to be identical. (The zonal winds match the tutorial results perfectly.)
b) The streamlines around the substellar point are not as well-organized as those shown on the tutorial page.
c) The energy-balance evolution (once corrected for issue 3 above) is somewhat different from the tutorial plot, although it has the same overall behavior.
In contrast to these three, the T-P and Q-P results are indistinguishable from the tutorial page results.