the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Enhancing Single-Precision with Quasi Double-Precision: Achieving Double-Precision Accuracy in the Model for Prediction Across Scales-Atmosphere (MPAS-A) version 8.2.1
Abstract. The development of numerical models are constrained by the limitations of high performance computing (HPC). Low precision computations can significantly reduce computational costs, but inevitably introduce rounding errors, which affect computational accuracy. Quasi double-precision algorithm can compensate for rounding errors by keeping corrections, thereby achieving the low numerical precision while maintaining result accuracy. This paper applies the algorithm to the Model for Prediction Across Scales-Atmosphere (MPAS-A) and evaluate its performance across four test cases. The results demonstrate that, after reducing numerical precision to single precision (from 64 bits to 32 bits), the application of quasi double-precision algorithm can achieve results comparable to double-precision computations. The round-off error of surface pressure is reduced by 68 %, 75 %, 97 %, 96 % in cases, the memory has been reduced by almost half, while the computation increases only 2 %, significantly reducing computational cost. The work substantiates both effectiveness and inexpensive computation in numerical models by using quasi double-precision algorithm.
- Preprint
(3054 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(393 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 22 Nov 2024)
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-2986', Anonymous Referee #1, 04 Oct 2024
reply
In the manuscript titled “Enhancing Single-Precision with Quasi Double-Precision: Achieving Double-Precision Accuracy in the Model for Prediction Across Scales-Atmosphere (MPAS-A) version 8.2.1”, the authors develop quasi double-precision algorithm, which can compensate for rounding errors by keeping corrections, thereby achieving the low numerical precision while maintaining result accuracy. By evaluating Model for Prediction Across Scales-Atmosphere (MPAS-A) performance, the algorithm can achieve results comparable to double-precision computations. There are still certain changes and clarifications that the authors should address prior to publication. For these reasons, I believe that the manuscript can be accepted for publication by the GMD after major revision. Below, I have some comments for the authors.
Major comments:
- Based on Figure 1 and Figure 2, this computational method appears somewhat simple. There is relatively little research on the keyword "quasi double-precision." The Authors could explain why their work is novel compared to the existed methods already published nowadays.
- The main point of applying signal precision computing methods is ensuring predictive, and reducing computational costs. The iterative precision compensation increases the computation load. Has this study considered the issue of computational efficiency? For example, runtime, reduced computational cost, they were mentioned in introduction literature review, but not studied in this study.
- The model is described poorly. The solution method for the equations is not even mentioned. For example, the finite difference scheme is mainly used to calculate the primary equations for variables studied in this work. And at which step of the equation is the quasi double-precision algorithm specifically applied? The strategy used to compute cell edge, dry air density, potential temperature with quasi double-precision algorithm is also difficult to understand from Figure 3.
- The color scheme in Figure 5 is very hard to distinguish; the solid purple area is too large, making the gradient difficult to see. Figure 10 has the same issue. It is recommended to refer to the classic NCL color scheme. https://www.ncl.ucar.edu/Applications/era40.shtml
- Figure 6 (a) shows that DBL-SGL decreases after 1.0, which appears to be caused by a coding error. Please check and confirm the validity of the data.
Minor comments:
- The color bar in Figure 7 seems almost useless.
- Please mention “round-off error” in relevant figures' captions.
- Figure 11 appears to be somewhat blurry.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2986-RC1
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
84 | 9 | 4 | 97 | 9 | 0 | 1 |
- HTML: 84
- PDF: 9
- XML: 4
- Total: 97
- Supplement: 9
- BibTeX: 0
- EndNote: 1
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1