Refine TC-Pairs consensus diagnostics configuration options

[JohnHalleyGotway]

Describe the Enhancement

Issue #2476 enhances the logic in TC-Pairs to include diagnostics when computing consensus tracks. This issue is to refine that logic based on feedback from @musgrave-kate to support the 2 new configuration options described in this issue comment.

1. Print a warning if diagnostics are present for AT LEAST one member but not present for ALL members.
2. Add two new config options in the consensus dictionary entries to provide finer handling of diagnostics:

• diag_min_req is similar to the min_req entry to specify the required number of diagnostics present to be included in the output.
• diag_required is similar to the required entry to specify the models that must contain diagnostics for them to be calculated.

In addition, revisit the diagnostics consensus test added to unit_tc_diag.xml using contrived data. Recommend replacing it with a better example.

Time Estimate

2 days

Sub-Issues

Consider breaking the enhancement down into sub-issues.
None needed.

Relevant Deadlines

List relevant project deadlines here or state NONE.

Funding Source

Define the source of funding and account keys here or state NONE.

Define the Metadata

Assignee

• Select engineer(s) or no engineer required
• Select scientist(s) or no scientist required: @jvigh to review.

Labels

• Review default alert labels
• Select component(s)
• Select priority
• Select requestor(s)

Milestone and Projects

• Select Milestone as the next official version or Backlog of Development Ideas
• For the next official version, select the MET-X.Y.Z Development project

Define Related Issue(s)

Consider the impact to the other METplus components.

• METplus, MET, METdataio, METviewer, METexpress, METcalcpy, METplotpy
• Enhance the TC-Pairs wrapper to support the new diag_required and diag_min_req configuration options METplus#2430 to update the TC-Pairs wrapper.

Enhancement Checklist

See the METplus Workflow for details.

• Complete the issue definition above, including the Time Estimate and Funding Source.
• Fork this repository or create a branch of develop.
  Branch name: feature_<Issue Number>_<Description>
• Complete the development and test your changes.
• Add/update log messages for easier debugging.
• Add/update unit tests.
• Add/update documentation.
• Push local changes to GitHub.
• Submit a pull request to merge into develop.
  Pull request: feature <Issue Number> <Description>
• Define the pull request metadata, as permissions allow.
  Select: Reviewer(s) and Development issue
  Select: Milestone as the next official version
  Select: MET-X.Y.Z Development project for development toward the next official release
• Iterate until the reviewer(s) accept and merge your changes.
• Delete your fork or branch.
• Close this issue.

[JohnHalleyGotway]

@musgrave-kate and @jvigh I worked on this issue today and made good progress. As part of this issue, I'd like to swap in a much more realistic unit test for computing diagnostics for a consensus track, but am waiting for good test data to do so.

Please LMK if/when you have an ensemble of CIRA diagnostics, along with their corresponding ATCF track files, I should use for this.