1028 Reduce export_input_data_county_timeseries

[HenrZu]

Changes and Information

Please briefly list the changes (main added features, changed items, or corrected bugs) made:

• The current code for the function export_input_data_county_timeseries is similar to the functionality in read_input_data_county.
• This redundancy also increases the susceptibility to errors, as both codes always have to be maintained.
• More unit tests for the extrapolation process

If need be, add additional information and what the reviewer should look out for in particular:

Merge Request - Guideline Checklist

Please check our git workflow. Use the draft feature if the Pull Request is not yet ready to review.

Checks by code author

• Every addressed issue is linked (use the "Closes #ISSUE" keyword below)
• New code adheres to coding guidelines
• No large data files have been added (files should in sum not exceed 100 KB, avoid PDFs, Word docs, etc.)
• Tests are added for new functionality and a local test run was successful (with and without OpenMP)
• Appropriate documentation for new functionality has been added (Doxygen in the code and Markdown files if necessary)
• Proper attention to licenses, especially no new third-party software with conflicting license has been added
• (For ABM development) Checked benchmark results and ran and posted a local test above from before and after development to ensure performance is monitored.

Checks by code reviewer(s)

• Corresponding issue(s) is/are linked and addressed
• Code is clean of development artifacts (no deactivated or commented code lines, no debugging printouts, etc.)
• Appropriate unit tests have been added, CI passes, code coverage and performance is acceptable (did not decrease)
• No large data files added in the whole history of commits(files should in sum not exceed 100 KB, avoid PDFs, Word docs, etc.)
• On merge, add 2-5 lines with the changes (main added features, changed items, or corrected bugs) to the merge-commit-message. This can be taken from the briefly-list-the-changes above (best case) or the separate commit messages (worst case).

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 98.09524% with 2 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 96.45%. Comparing base (896a04e) to head (49de116).
Report is 5 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
cpp/models/ode_secir/parameters_io.cpp	0.00%	2 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##             main    #1029    +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage   96.44%   96.45%            
========================================
  Files         135      135            
  Lines       11286    10817   -469     
========================================
- Hits        10885    10433   -452     
+ Misses        401      384    -17     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[HenrZu]

I have compared the runtime of the new extrapolation function with the old one. The results are almost identical. The result shown are for the secir model.

Num Days	1	5	10	20
New Version	30,3303	42,7880	58,3960	90,1510
Old Version	29,3939	42,1209	57,7696	89,6838

[lenaploetzke]

Thank you for your work!
A review of the tests is actually still missing.
Small explanation for the rather detailed review of the parameters_io files:
I wanted to write similar functionality for another model and found these files quite confusing. Less code duplication, less function arguments and a complete and correct documentation would have helped. That's why I put more emphasis on this.

Please in particular consider combining the functions export_input_data_county_timeseries and read_input_data_county.

[lenaploetzke]

Nice work :) I like the ideas of the tests. Please change some small things.

[lenaploetzke]

Thanks for all the work and for including the review comments. I have just a few more comments (and some of them are optional).

[lenaploetzke]

Very good :)