Closed ma-sadeghi closed 11 months ago
The redundancy removal is relatively computationally intensive and not all potential circuits in the population perform well enough to merit checking for redundant components. I chose 3 as an appropriate value trading off computational complexity with the need for finding simple well-performing circuits. I suppose I could turn this value into an optional argument if necessary
Thanks for the explanation. I understand now. It's just that (for debugging purposes) I set population_size = 2
, which broke the code, since it was trying to reach into population[3]
.
Hi, quick question: why's there a hardcoded "3" in the following snippet?
https://github.com/MaximeVH/EquivalentCircuits.jl/blob/7ecc804e196b466164093a55d9ece61c1340b767/src/CircuitEvolution.jl#L231-L233