-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 26
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
Laplace solution #1360
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Laplace solution #1360
Conversation
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #1360 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 95.53% 95.36% -0.17%
==========================================
Files 96 96
Lines 25044 25161 +117
==========================================
+ Hits 23925 23995 +70
- Misses 1119 1166 +47
|
| benchmark_name | dt(%) | dt(s) | t_new(s) | t_old(s) |
| -------------------------------------- | ---------------------- | ---------------------- | ---------------------- | ---------------------- |
test_build_transform_fft_lowres | -4.48 +/- 9.42 | -2.47e-02 +/- 5.20e-02 | 5.27e-01 +/- 2.4e-02 | 5.52e-01 +/- 4.6e-02 |
test_equilibrium_init_medres | -5.46 +/- 7.08 | -2.39e-01 +/- 3.11e-01 | 4.15e+00 +/- 2.1e-01 | 4.39e+00 +/- 2.3e-01 |
test_equilibrium_init_highres | -2.53 +/- 2.52 | -1.41e-01 +/- 1.41e-01 | 5.45e+00 +/- 4.4e-02 | 5.59e+00 +/- 1.3e-01 |
test_objective_compile_dshape_current | -1.12 +/- 1.96 | -4.45e-02 +/- 7.77e-02 | 3.92e+00 +/- 3.6e-02 | 3.96e+00 +/- 6.9e-02 |
test_objective_compute_dshape_current | -0.04 +/- 1.76 | -1.94e-06 +/- 9.02e-05 | 5.13e-03 +/- 3.3e-05 | 5.13e-03 +/- 8.4e-05 |
test_objective_jac_dshape_current | -0.66 +/- 6.50 | -2.81e-04 +/- 2.76e-03 | 4.22e-02 +/- 1.1e-03 | 4.25e-02 +/- 2.5e-03 |
test_perturb_2 | -0.19 +/- 2.07 | -3.79e-02 +/- 4.07e-01 | 1.96e+01 +/- 2.1e-01 | 1.97e+01 +/- 3.5e-01 |
test_proximal_freeb_jac | -0.81 +/- 1.57 | -6.02e-02 +/- 1.17e-01 | 7.37e+00 +/- 9.3e-02 | 7.43e+00 +/- 7.0e-02 |
test_solve_fixed_iter | +0.02 +/- 2.82 | +6.67e-03 +/- 8.03e-01 | 2.84e+01 +/- 4.9e-01 | 2.84e+01 +/- 6.3e-01 |
test_LinearConstraintProjection_build | +0.24 +/- 1.11 | +5.61e-02 +/- 2.64e-01 | 2.39e+01 +/- 2.5e-01 | 2.39e+01 +/- 9.3e-02 |
test_build_transform_fft_midres | -2.92 +/- 6.00 | -1.84e-02 +/- 3.78e-02 | 6.11e-01 +/- 3.6e-02 | 6.30e-01 +/- 1.2e-02 |
test_build_transform_fft_highres | -3.78 +/- 2.58 | -3.79e-02 +/- 2.59e-02 | 9.65e-01 +/- 1.2e-02 | 1.00e+00 +/- 2.3e-02 |
test_equilibrium_init_lowres | -8.24 +/- 5.57 | -3.44e-01 +/- 2.33e-01 | 3.83e+00 +/- 1.7e-01 | 4.18e+00 +/- 1.6e-01 |
test_objective_compile_atf | -1.08 +/- 4.10 | -8.85e-02 +/- 3.36e-01 | 8.12e+00 +/- 3.3e-01 | 8.20e+00 +/- 6.5e-02 |
test_objective_compute_atf | +3.13 +/- 3.60 | +5.00e-04 +/- 5.74e-04 | 1.64e-02 +/- 4.8e-04 | 1.59e-02 +/- 3.2e-04 |
test_objective_jac_atf | -0.09 +/- 2.44 | -1.78e-03 +/- 4.82e-02 | 1.97e+00 +/- 4.3e-02 | 1.97e+00 +/- 2.2e-02 |
test_perturb_1 | -2.49 +/- 4.61 | -3.82e-01 +/- 7.07e-01 | 1.50e+01 +/- 6.3e-01 | 1.53e+01 +/- 3.2e-01 |
+test_proximal_jac_atf | -1.97 +/- 0.61 | -1.66e-01 +/- 5.08e-02 | 8.23e+00 +/- 4.3e-02 | 8.39e+00 +/- 2.7e-02 |
test_proximal_freeb_compute | -0.51 +/- 1.52 | -1.03e-03 +/- 3.10e-03 | 2.03e-01 +/- 1.2e-03 | 2.04e-01 +/- 2.9e-03 |
test_solve_fixed_iter_compiled | -0.49 +/- 1.10 | -8.45e-02 +/- 1.89e-01 | 1.72e+01 +/- 9.4e-02 | 1.73e+01 +/- 1.6e-01 | |
I'll push the simpler method we talked about. Regardless it is not expected for the current method to not satisfy the lcfs condition. Am I missing something in the implementation? If you are available, but would like to be caught up on the code or math let me know. |
waiting on #1440