Scientific computing · evidence summary

Prove the run path before the science begins.

A large scientific run is a poor place to discover that compilation, job submission or output collection is broken.

The research prompt

Research prompt · edited for public presentation

Run a minimal CESM infrastructure test: compset X with dead model components, resolution f19_g17, and a one-day run. Create the case, build it, submit it, confirm time-stepping and summarize the output.

A completed build-to-output check.

The record reports a one-model-day smoke test, a 35-second model execution, and restart output. This established an infrastructure receipt for subsequent work.

Infrastructure smoke test with dead model components. No climate finding is claimed.

The recorded investigation

Specify a minimal acceptance test

The user explicitly requested dead model components and one model day, to prove the pipeline rather than perform science.

Build, submit and inspect

The supplied report records case creation, a 289-second build, cluster submission and 48 coupler steps of 1,800 seconds.

Leave a bounded infrastructure receipt

The report records a 35-second model execution and restart output. A claim that the case name automatically selected test mode was retracted.

Where the conclusion stops

The next useful test

Advance to a real-physics configuration and verify its input data and output fields.

Selected scientific files

These files support inspection of the study. They are not a complete package of run inputs, dependencies or raw outputs. Scientific scripts are provided for reading; this website does not execute them.

No separate scientific download is available for this record.

This is an editorial evidence summary of a recorded investigation, including later requests and review. The prompt animation is a presentation of saved work, not a live simulation. Human time saved was not measured.