This repository has been archived by the owner on Jun 1, 2023. It is now read-only.
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…s able to find data for 85/86 stream sites.
…at returned no data in NGWOS period.
…n original site list. Run through crosswalk step.
…e getting dropped, even though they matched to the reach well. Added one site manually because it is in lower DRB where river is wide, and missed our bird distance cutoff.
…mp data so we can see changes between data updates. This summary was manually written on the pervious data so we can see the change in NGWOS and fish distance.
…sening fish distance criteria from 5km to 20km. In post-1980 data (our model timeframe) we gained 23 sites, 11 of which had 30+ observed years!
jsadler2
reviewed
May 7, 2020
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It looks good to me, Sam.
|
||
ngwos_dat <- readRDS(sc_retrieve(ngwos_ind)) %>% | ||
mutate(site_id = paste0('USGS-', site_id)) %>% | ||
rename(temp_degC = temp_c) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think I started using all temp_degC
. Are you using all temp_c
? I'm fine either way, but it'd be good for me to know, that way I can be consistent.
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR updates the NGWOS for a rerun of the NGWOS experiment. Highlights include:
A narrative of what sites get included in our experiment, documented here. Of the 86 potential stream temp observations sites, 56 are included in the experiment setup. This bumps the percentage of training data that is NGWOS from 5% to 8%.
c5f41a4 -- adds and munges NGWOS spreadsheet from Brian Pellerin to get all NGWOS sites.
adf0809 -- modified the NGWOS site filter, messages user when sites are dropped due to having too much pre-NGWOS data (in a period from 2013-2017) or had no data in the NGWOS period.
e915c22 -- I noticed that some sites were not making it through the pipeline because they were in the middle of the reach, and hence violated our "fish distance" criteria (was set at 5km). Some segments are much longer, and sites along the reach were being dropped. I changed the distance to 20km. Not sure what the consequences are (in terms of observations representing the reach -- it definitely increased total observations and observed sites).
c5c96f8 -- documents the change in temperature observations after the update in NGWOS data and the change in fish distance. We gained ~9k daily observations from the NGWOS experiments.