[QC]: atmos_4xdaily slp

[jlave89]

Variable ID

slp

Experiment

Historical

Time Range

1921010100-2010123123

Do the datasets pass the quality control checks?

Yes

Explain the steps taken for quality control:

QC Steps
Domain, variable values, variable attributes, and file timestamps were checked for completion, validity, and consistency.

1. Domain bounds and shape were checked for consistency across all files.
2. Variable values were checked for missing values and against a valid range of values. For SLP, this valid range was set to 85000 to 110000 Pa.
3. Variable attributes 'long_name', 'units', ‘missing_value’, and ‘_FillValue’ were checked for consistency across all files.
4. Data time ranges were compared with file name start and end time ranges.
5. Used CF Compliance Checker on data using https://cfchecker.ncas.ac.uk/.

Potential Issues

1. For the 4xdaily variable slp we found inconsistency between the time range listed in the file names and the time range of the data in the files. Specifically, the start time in each file name is the 0th hour of the 1st year, e.g. 1921010100, but the first time stamp in the data is the 6th hour of the 1st year, e.g. 1921010106. Also, the end time in the file name is the 23rd hour of the 10th year, e.g. 1930123123, but the final time stamp in the data is the 0th hour of the 11th year, e.g. 1931010100. This might cause confusion, since the last time stamp is outside of the time range stated in the file name and the first time is off by one time step.
2. The file had 5 warnings related to CF compliance:
   WARN: (2.6.1): No 'Conventions' attribute present
   WARN: (7.1): Boundary var lat_bnds should not have attribute units
   WARN: (7.1): Boundary var lat_bnds should not have attribute axis
   WARN: (7.1): Boundary var lon_bnds should not have attribute units
   WARN: (7.1): Boundary var lon_bnds should not have attribute axis

[ariaradick]

@jlave89 the issue with the time range listed is solved upon cmorizing the data. Would you consider the datasets to pass QC if that issue is fixed?

[ariaradick]

@jlave89 following up on this, we are planning to publish the datasets on Monday 6/8/2026, but I would prefer to get confirmation from you that they pass qc beforehand. Can you reply with what you think would be sufficient to consider these datasets to pass qc? (For both this, slp, and snow_tot)

[jlave89]

@ariaradick yes, with the time issue solved then we would consider them to pass QC.