feat(library <-> taxonomy check) by dusanparipovic · Pull Request #214 · AntaresSimulatorTeam/GemsPy

dusanparipovic · 2026-05-29T19:03:57Z

No description provided.

…ile.py

…s.py

… implement corresponding unit test for YAML parsing

… taxonomy_category field

…my category - Introduced optional `properties` for components in `system.yml`, allowing key/value pairs that are normalized into a dictionary. - Added optional `taxonomy-category` field for models in library YAML files, accessible via `ModelSchema.taxonomy_category`. - Updated documentation to reflect these changes and provided examples in the user guide.

- Updated documentation to replace "key" with "id" in the context of component properties in `system.yml`. - Adjusted test assertions to reflect the change from "key" to "id" for consistency with the updated documentation. - Ensured that error messages for duplicate properties also refer to "id" instead of "key".

- Added a new `Study` dataclass that combines `System` and `DataBase`, centralizing consistency checks. - Updated `build_problem()` and `build_decomposed_problems()` to accept `Study` directly. - Refactored related functions and tests to utilize the new `Study` structure, ensuring seamless integration. - Removed redundant parameters and streamlined the API for better clarity and usability.

dusanparipovic · 2026-05-29T19:15:22Z

Open questions:

This PR opens again question about shared library which will be used across our gems eco system.
In fact we have duplicate of class for Taxonomy inside GVB and Gemspy.
Also this PR opens question: do we want to be able to have multiple taxonomies and do we want to reference it inside library file.
For more details see issue inside GVB

dusanparipovic · 2026-05-29T19:15:37Z

Open questions:

This PR opens again question about shared library which will be used across our gems eco system.

In fact we have duplicate of class for Taxonomy inside GVB and Gemspy.

Also this PR opens question: do we want to be able to have multiple taxonomies and do we want to reference it inside library file.

For more details see issue inside GVB

@aoustry @tbittar

tbittar

You need to do more complete checks between the taxonomy and models (variables, parameters, constraints, properties, extra-outputs)
The models should declare a list of properties such as :

model: thermal
   properties:
        - id: carrier
        - id: technology

We need to check that each model declares the required properties from the taxonomy (but it could declare additional ones)

If a model defines a property, it should be defined for each component of this model within the system file. We need to add a check for this. A component in the system may define additional properties that are not required by the model

I think we should keep this PR on the checks model <-> taxonomy for everything but the properties and handle the work on the properties (which may modify the models, systems and tests) in another PR (check taxonomy <-> library and library <-> system)

tbittar · 2026-06-03T12:31:21Z


+---
+
+## System YAML: optional component `properties`


Suggested change

## System YAML: optional component `properties`

## System YAML: optional field `properties` for components

tbittar · 2026-06-03T12:32:35Z

+At resolution time (`resolve_system` / `load_study`), this list is normalized into
+a `dict[str, str]` stored on the resolved `Component`. Duplicate ids are rejected.


Do we need these technical details here ? Only mentioning that duplicated ids are forbidden is sufficient ?

tbittar · 2026-06-03T12:33:01Z


+---
+
+## System YAML: optional component `properties`


Should the model declare the list of possible properties ?

tbittar · 2026-06-03T12:54:02Z

---
+- **System components: `properties`** - introduces optional `properties` on components in `system.yml` (a list of `id`/`value` pairs). These are normalized into a `dict[str, str]` on the resolved `Component` (duplicate ids raise a `ValueError`).
+- **Model schema: `taxonomy-category`** - introduces optional `taxonomy-category` on models in library YAML files, exposed as `ModelSchema.taxonomy_category`.
+- **Taxonomy check** - new `gems.model.taxonomy` module with `load_taxonomy(path)` and `check_library_against_taxonomy(library, taxonomy)`. Validates that every model declaring a `taxonomy-category` references a category that exists in the taxonomy file, and exposes all port IDs required by that category. Taxonomy classes (`TaxonomyItem`, `TaxonomyCategory`, `Taxonomy`) mirror the structure defined in GEMS-ViewsBuilder.


I don't think the last sentence is relevant as we do not want to mention GEMSViewsBuilder within GemsPy

tbittar · 2026-06-03T12:55:47Z

---
+- **System components: `properties`** - introduces optional `properties` on components in `system.yml` (a list of `id`/`value` pairs). These are normalized into a `dict[str, str]` on the resolved `Component` (duplicate ids raise a `ValueError`).
+- **Model schema: `taxonomy-category`** - introduces optional `taxonomy-category` on models in library YAML files, exposed as `ModelSchema.taxonomy_category`.
+- **Taxonomy check** - new `gems.model.taxonomy` module with `load_taxonomy(path)` and `check_library_against_taxonomy(library, taxonomy)`. Validates that every model declaring a `taxonomy-category` references a category that exists in the taxonomy file, and exposes all port IDs required by that category. Taxonomy classes (`TaxonomyItem`, `TaxonomyCategory`, `Taxonomy`) mirror the structure defined in GEMS-ViewsBuilder.


Suggested change

- **Taxonomy check** - new `gems.model.taxonomy` module with `load_taxonomy(path)` and `check_library_against_taxonomy(library, taxonomy)`. Validates that every model declaring a `taxonomy-category` references a category that exists in the taxonomy file, and exposes all port IDs required by that category. Taxonomy classes (`TaxonomyItem`, `TaxonomyCategory`, `Taxonomy`) mirror the structure defined in GEMS-ViewsBuilder.

- **Taxonomy check** - new `gems.model.taxonomy` module with `load_taxonomy(path)` and `check_library_against_taxonomy(library, taxonomy)`. Validates that every model declaring a `taxonomy-category` references a category that exists in the taxonomy file, and exposes all variables, parameters, constraints, ports, extra-outputs and properties required by that category. Taxonomy classes (`TaxonomyItem`, `TaxonomyCategory`, `Taxonomy`) mirror the structure defined in GEMS-ViewsBuilder.

tbittar · 2026-06-03T12:59:25Z

+    """
+    Validates that every model declaring a taxonomy_category:
+      1. References a category that exists in the taxonomy.
+      2. Exposes all port IDs listed in that taxonomy category.


Suggested change

2. Exposes all port IDs listed in that taxonomy category.

2. Exposes all variables, parameters, constraints, ports, extra-outputs and properties listed in that taxonomy category.

tbittar · 2026-06-03T13:04:11Z

+            )
+
+        category = categories[cat_id]
+        model_port_ids = {p.id for p in model_schema.ports}


You need to check more than just the ports, see above comment

tbittar · 2026-06-03T16:08:08Z

These tests seem redundant (and less complete) than the one in test_components_parsing.py. Should we remove them ?

dusanparipovic added 11 commits May 1, 2026 17:35

feat(properties): add properties field to support system parsing

b3ee369

fix(tests): remove unnecessary blank line in test_systemschema_from_f…

e089664

…ile.py

refactor: remove unused import PortsConnection from resolve_component…

32a3747

…s.py

feat(schema): add optional taxonomy_category field to ModelSchema and…

9f9494e

… implement corresponding unit test for YAML parsing

Apply suggestion from @dusanparipovic

62ae1d0

Update gemspy version to 0.1.0 and clean up whitespace in ModelSchema…

d5f866f

… taxonomy_category field

feat(changelog): add changelog

1c491eb

fix(ruff): fix ruff format on new files

af92292

dusanparipovic requested review from aoustry and tbittar and removed request for tbittar May 29, 2026 19:15

tbittar mentioned this pull request Jun 3, 2026

[WIP RTE] Catalogs and Taxonomy for Antares Legacy Models AntaresSimulatorTeam/AntaresLegacyModels-to-GEMS-Converter#43

Open

tbittar requested changes Jun 3, 2026

View reviewed changes

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

feat(library <-> taxonomy check)#214

feat(library <-> taxonomy check)#214
dusanparipovic wants to merge 11 commits into
developfrom
models-taxonomy-check

dusanparipovic commented May 29, 2026

Uh oh!

dusanparipovic commented May 29, 2026

Uh oh!

dusanparipovic commented May 29, 2026

Open questions:

Uh oh!

tbittar left a comment •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

tbittar Jun 3, 2026

Uh oh!

tbittar Jun 3, 2026

Uh oh!

tbittar Jun 3, 2026

Uh oh!

tbittar Jun 3, 2026

Uh oh!

tbittar Jun 3, 2026

Uh oh!

tbittar Jun 3, 2026

Uh oh!

tbittar Jun 3, 2026

Uh oh!

tbittar Jun 3, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

	## System YAML: optional component `properties`
	## System YAML: optional field `properties` for components

		At resolution time (`resolve_system` / `load_study`), this list is normalized into
		a `dict[str, str]` stored on the resolved `Component`. Duplicate ids are rejected.

	2. Exposes all port IDs listed in that taxonomy category.
	2. Exposes all variables, parameters, constraints, ports, extra-outputs and properties listed in that taxonomy category.

Conversation

dusanparipovic commented May 29, 2026

Uh oh!

dusanparipovic commented May 29, 2026

Open questions:

Uh oh!

dusanparipovic commented May 29, 2026

Open questions:

Uh oh!

tbittar left a comment • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

tbittar left a comment •

edited

Loading