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

Bisection should ignore atomic intervals #84

Closed
dpsanders opened this issue Jun 30, 2017 · 5 comments · Fixed by #593
Closed

Bisection should ignore atomic intervals #84

dpsanders opened this issue Jun 30, 2017 · 5 comments · Fixed by #593

Comments

@dpsanders
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@dpsanders
Copy link
Member Author

And return an indication of whether the intervalbox is atomic (ie atomic on each direction)

@dpsanders
Copy link
Member Author

Note that a box is atomic only if each interval in the box is.

@dpsanders
Copy link
Member Author

Probably it should return (X, ∅) if X is atomic.

@Kolaru
Copy link
Collaborator

Kolaru commented Mar 4, 2019

Note that a box is atomic only if each interval in the box is.

This is true, but we will have to be careful: the non atomic dimension may not be the biggest one.

julia> X = IntervalBox(0..1, 10.0^100..nextfloat(10.0^100))
[0, 1] × [9.99999e+99, 1.00001e+100]

julia> bisect(X)
([0, 1] × [9.99999e+99, 1.00001e+100], [0, 1] × [1e+100, 1.00001e+100])

Also this doesn't seem to be part of the standard (freedom !), and I like the (X, ∅) proposition.

@dpsanders
Copy link
Member Author

Good point! That will be tricky to handle.

I guess broadcast isatomic over the IntervalBox and bisect the first dimension that is not atomic.

@OlivierHnt OlivierHnt mentioned this issue Dec 1, 2023
1 task
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 a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants