Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Try updating compats #250

Merged
merged 12 commits into from
Apr 23, 2024
Merged

Try updating compats #250

merged 12 commits into from
Apr 23, 2024

Conversation

jClugstor
Copy link
Member

Checklist

  • Appropriate tests were added
  • Any code changes were done in a way that does not break public API
  • All documentation related to code changes were updated
  • The new code follows the
    contributor guidelines, in particular the SciML Style Guide and
    COLPRAC.
  • Any new documentation only uses public API

Additional context

Add any other context about the problem here.

@jClugstor jClugstor changed the title Update Compats Try updating compats Apr 17, 2024
@jClugstor
Copy link
Member Author

All tests except threshold should pass.
Changes need to be made in some of the intervention functions. Things that are expecting scalars are getting vectors. In one of the tests, optimal_parameter_intervention_for_reach is trying to treat a tuple as callable.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Apr 17, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 78.81%. Comparing base (c1a41ef) to head (5c5056d).
Report is 4 commits behind head on main.

❗ Current head 5c5056d differs from pull request most recent head e1c765e. Consider uploading reports for the commit e1c765e to get more accurate results

Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #250       +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage   92.02%   78.81%   -13.22%     
===========================================
  Files           7        7               
  Lines         439      439               
===========================================
- Hits          404      346       -58     
- Misses         35       93       +58     

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

@jClugstor
Copy link
Member Author

This assumes that the cost function is intended to return a scalar, which should always be true as far as I know. The tuple stuff was because of a weird REPL state that I had where p was an array. Maybe if build_function ends up returning a tuple we should add an error message saying that the cost function should return a scalar?

There's still one more thing to fix in prob_violating_threshold, something to do with SciMLExpectations.

@ChrisRackauckas
Copy link
Member

Is it not using the latest Integrals.jl?

@jClugstor
Copy link
Member Author

My manifest says version = 4.4.1 which I believe is the latest.

@jClugstor
Copy link
Member Author

I just needed to get rid of the batch = 0, so it defaults to batch = nothing which I think is in line with what was intended anyway.

@jClugstor jClugstor marked this pull request as ready for review April 22, 2024 18:56
@jClugstor
Copy link
Member Author

Tests pass locally now. Looks like the tests for datafit passed, but there was an issue in code coverage, which caused the core tests to abort.

@ChrisRackauckas ChrisRackauckas merged commit a195d0a into SciML:main Apr 23, 2024
2 of 6 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants