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

SacessOptimizer: More frequent cooperation #1194

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Nov 20, 2023

Conversation

dweindl
Copy link
Member

@dweindl dweindl commented Nov 19, 2023

Check during every ESS iteration if cooperation/adaptation critera are met.

Check during every ESS iteration if cooperation/adaptation critera are met.
@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Nov 19, 2023

Codecov Report

Attention: 35 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (4a953cd) 82.88% compared to head (261cf82) 53.18%.

❗ Current head 261cf82 differs from pull request most recent head 1c5cd3e. Consider uploading reports for the commit 1c5cd3e to get more accurate results

Files Patch % Lines
pypesto/optimize/ess/refset.py 5.00% 19 Missing ⚠️
pypesto/optimize/ess/sacess.py 5.88% 16 Missing ⚠️

❗ Your organization needs to install the Codecov GitHub app to enable full functionality.

Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##           develop    #1194       +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage    82.88%   53.18%   -29.71%     
============================================
  Files          148      148               
  Lines        11724    11750       +26     
============================================
- Hits          9718     6249     -3469     
- Misses        2006     5501     +3495     

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

Copy link
Collaborator

@PaulJonasJost PaulJonasJost left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I do not exactly see how the cooperation became more frequent, but otherwise looks fine. As far as I recall, the keep_going part shortened due to a previous PR?

@dweindl
Copy link
Member Author

dweindl commented Nov 20, 2023

I do not exactly see how the cooperation became more frequent, but otherwise looks fine. As far as I recall, the keep_going part shortened due to a previous PR?

Previously, a full scatter search was run (incorrectly) instead of only a single iteration. The previous PR was some refactoring to enable performing only one single iteration.

@dweindl dweindl merged commit 0e0686a into ICB-DCM:develop Nov 20, 2023
18 checks passed
@dweindl dweindl deleted the sacess_more_comm_ branch November 20, 2023 11:02
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.

3 participants