-Inf values in raster outputs of Coastal Blue Carbon Model

Hi James,

I’ve been getting -Inf values in some of the output rasters of the Coastal Blue Carbon Model (v 3.7). In other rasters, the high value is 3.40282e+38 and the low value is -3.40282e+38, neither of which is the NoData value of the input or output rasters. The model completes successfully, but I keep getting these errors. I’ve tried this on two different machines. When I switch from running this on windows 10 + ArcMap 10.4 to windows 7 + ArcMap 10.6.1, more -Inf values are produce and none of the rasters have the 3.40282e+38 values. In either case, ArcMap cannot compute the histogram so the true carbon values can’t be visualized.

The other strange thing is that I used the exact same input layers but with an earlier set of years (trying to compare what happens if restoration begins at different time points). All of the outputs looked fine using the earlier years with the exception of carbon stock in the start year, which had a low value of -Inf. I have a carbon stock raster of that year already, so I have been ignoring the -Inf in this particular layer, but now I’m wondering if it’s causing bigger problems down the line.

I’ve attached three log files:
Many -Inf later restoration 2050.txt (17.6 KB)
Many 3_40282e38 later restoration 2050.txt (17.4 KB)
Only 1 -Inf rearlier restoration 2030.txt (18.6 KB)

Hi Monica,

Very curious! I’ve taken a shot at patching this (since it seems related a thread on the old forums where the model wasn’t handling a reclassification case correctly). Would you mind trying out this development build and seeing if that does the trick?


Please do let me know if that doesn’t resolve the issue.


Hi James,

I tried it out and I got fewer -Inf values, but -Inf was still the low value for carbon stock in the start year and for net present value.


InVEST-Coastal-Blue-Carbon-log-2019-06-07–10_22_18.txt (9.82 KB)

Hmm I’m not quite sure what’s going on there, but nice to hear that some of the -inf pixels are at least taken care of. Could you send me your inputs for this run so I can take another look? Or are these the same data that you had sent previously?