Towards standardising output datasets using the numerical obstacle-resolving model MITRAS as an example
Abstract. The publication of well-described FAIR datasets is an important part of atmospheric modelling and research. Data standards ensure that datasets are delivered in a consistent way that is easy to understand for a data user. Standards define how the data is described, i.e. which variable names, descriptions and data formats are used. However, existing model data standards such as the CF conventions are mainly adapted for global or regional scale models. For atmospheric micro-scale obstacle-resolving (urban) models (ORMs), there is no discipline-specific model data standard and the existing ones are not fully suitable to adequately describe ORM datasets. To overcome the lack of standardisation processes, the ATMODAT STANDARD has been developed to promote the publication of FAIR datasets when no discipline-specific standard is available. This paper describes the process of producing standardised model results. The processing for ORM MITRAS serve as an example to show possible ways for the publication of FAIR datasets. The adaptation of the model's post-processing routine M2CDF and the development of a new post-processing routine called NC2ATMODAT are shown. The last may be applicable by other ORM modellers, its limitations, challenges and further use cases are discussed. Application of the two post-processors allows the preparation of datasets according to the requirements of the CF convention and the ATMODAT STANDARD. The first standardised MITRAS datasets are successfully processed and published.
Dear authors,
Unfortunately, after checking your manuscript, it has come to our attention that it does not comply with our "Code and Data Policy".
https://www.geoscientific-model-development.net/policies/code_and_data_policy.html
Specifically, you do not provide the M2CDF code that you use in your work. You state that it can be obtained by contacting an email address, but we can not accept this unless you show that publishing it is out of your control or forbidden to you. For this, first, you need to clarify the terms of the license of M2CDF, and also, explain what prevents you of publishing it, or discussing with their authors that they publish it. This last point is specially relevant as the M2CDF software is developed in your institution, which makes harder to understand what prevents you from publishing it.
The GMD review process depends on reviewers and community commentators being able to access, during the discussion phase, the code and data on which a manuscript depends. Please, therefore, if possible publish the M2CDF code in one of the appropriate repositories and reply to this comment with the relevant information (link and a permanent identifier for it (e.g. DOI)) as soon as possible. We cannot have manuscripts under discussion that do not comply with our policy. The 'Code and Data Availability’ section must also be modified to cite the new repository locations, and corresponding references added to the bibliography.
I must note that if you do not fix this problem, we cannot continue with the peer-review process or accept your manuscript for publication in GMD.
Juan A. Añel
Geosci. Model Dev. Executive Editor