EAMxx: handle potential nan in within-interval checks

[mahf708]

inverts comparison logic in property checks to use IEEE 754 (NaN < value returns false; NaN > value returns false) to carefully account for the existence of NaN values in comparisons instead of silently ignoring them.

Fixes #7384

[BFB]

[Copilot]

Pull Request Overview

This PR inverts the comparison logic in the min/max value checks, replacing direct </> operations with negated >=/<= expressions across multiple dimensional lambdas.

• Swapped v(...) < result.min_val to not v(...)>=result.min_val
• Swapped v(...) > result.max_val to not v(...)<=result.max_val
• Applied change consistently for 1D through 6D views

Comments suppressed due to low confidence (2)

components/eamxx/src/share/property_checks/field_within_interval_check.cpp:99

• The expression not v(i)>=result.min_val is parsed as (not v(i)) >= result.min_val, which is almost certainly not the intended logic. Use !(v(i) >= result.min_val) or revert to v(i) < result.min_val for correctness.

if (not v(i)>=result.min_val) {

components/eamxx/src/share/property_checks/field_within_interval_check.cpp:103

• Similarly, not v(i)<=result.max_val is parsed as (not v(i)) <= result.max_val, which does not implement the intended v(i) > result.max_val. Consider !(v(i) <= result.max_val) or v(i) > result.max_val.

if (not v(i)<=result.max_val) {

[Copilot]

Pull Request Overview

This PR inverts the comparison logic used in the min/max value checks across all dimensional variants of the FieldWithinIntervalCheck parallel reductions.

• Replaces direct </> checks with negated >=/<= expressions for min/max comparisons.
• Applies this change consistently for 1D through 7D fields.
• No change in overall algorithmic behavior (BFB).

Comments suppressed due to low confidence (2)

components/eamxx/src/share/property_checks/field_within_interval_check.cpp:99

• [nitpick] Using an inverted not (v(i) >= result.min_val) reduces readability compared to a direct v(i) < result.min_val. Consider reverting to the simpler form for clarity.

if (not (v(i) >= result.min_val)) {

components/eamxx/src/share/property_checks/field_within_interval_check.cpp:103

• [nitpick] Using an inverted not (v(i) <= result.max_val) reduces readability compared to a direct v(i) > result.max_val. Consider using the direct comparison.

if (not (v(i) <= result.max_val)) {

[singhbalwinder]

@mahf708 : Does the Kokkos::isnan() function work for detecting NaNs?

[mahf708]

@mahf708 : Does the Kokkos::isnan() function work for detecting NaNs?

yeah, should work; note we use ekat::is_invalid() for the specific FieldNaNCheck, see components/eamxx/src/share/property_checks/field_nan_check.cpp.

Here, the goal is to ensure the FieldWithinIntervalCheck is sound (nan cannot really be in any bounded internval [a, b] by definition, or at least by any reasonable assumption). The problem was that we were silently ignoring the possibility of nan in [a, b] when where were checking the values... thus nan ending up circumventing the check altogether :/