Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Error in building VA 2020 two-region disaggregated model #26

Open
bl-young opened this issue Mar 29, 2023 · 3 comments
Open

Error in building VA 2020 two-region disaggregated model #26

bl-young opened this issue Mar 29, 2023 · 3 comments
Assignees
Labels
bug Something isn't working

Comments

@bl-young
Copy link
Collaborator

Error in buildTwoRegionUseModel(state, year, ioschema = 2012, iolevel = iolevel,  : 
  RoUS (of Virginia)'s commodity output summed from two-region (total) Use table doesn't equal to RoUS's commodity output.
Calls: source ... eval -> assembleTwoRegionIO -> buildTwoRegionUseModel
Execution halted

https://github.com/USEPA/stateior/actions/runs/4549476400/jobs/8021585025

@bl-young bl-young added the bug Something isn't working label Mar 29, 2023
@bl-young bl-young changed the title Error in building VA 2020 two-region model Error in building VA 2020 two-region disaggregated model Mar 29, 2023
@bl-young
Copy link
Collaborator Author

This is for disaggregated models, v0.3.0

@jvendries
Copy link
Collaborator

As mentioned in the stop message, this error occurs because there is a difference in the values calculated for the commodity output for the RoUS calculated using the US commodity totals and the RoUS calculated using the the two table structure (RoUS2RoUS + RoUS2SoI) for the non-domestic tables.

The specific sector in question is the Other commodity (last commodity in the table), where the value for the latter calculation is $2 million lower than the former. This is usually not a big enough value to create a > 1% difference threshold used as a check, but the value of the Other commodity is low enough in the first place that it results in a approximately a 1.1% difference. This is the only sector that fails this check for the 2020 disaggregated VA model.

Since this is only happening in the 2020 disaggregated version, I am still tracking where exactly in the disaggregation steps the difference is introduced to the Other sector, as this is not a sector that is treated any differently for this year than any other in the current test runs.

I'll post an update when I find the exact cause, but given the small difference I am inclined to suspect the error arises in the 2020 table due to a rounding error with smaller initial values in the VA tables for this particular year rather than an error with the disaggregation code per se.

@bl-young
Copy link
Collaborator Author

bl-young commented Feb 7, 2024

this issue is resolved following e1ed152
@jvendries please let me know if you agree and we can close this

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants