search

SciML / Surrogates.jl

Surrogate modeling and optimization for scientific machine learning (SciML)
https://docs.sciml.ai/Surrogates/stable/
Other
330 stars 69 forks source link

Few cleanups related to julia version, compats and tests of SurrogatesMOE #460

Closed sathvikbhagavan closed 9 months ago

sathvikbhagavan commented 9 months ago

Context

  1. Use Julia 1.10 for all subpackages
  2. Use latest flux everywhere
  3. A couple of tests fail spuriously in SurrogatesMOE because of RandomSampling like in https://github.com/SciML/Surrogates.jl/pull/459. This happens when one of the clusters in the Gaussian Mixture Model is empty. We should handle it more elegantly. I will look into it in a subsequent PR. To prevent spurious failures, I have changed it to use a deterministic method.
  4. Format the repo - only couple of lines were unformatted
sathvikbhagavan commented 9 months ago

@ArnoStrouwen, is there any reason we use old version of Tracker and Flux? I bumped the compat of Flux but it causes downgrade CI to fail - https://github.com/SciML/Surrogates.jl/actions/runs/7355008364/job/20022994040?pr=460

codecov[bot] commented 9 months ago

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:

Comparison is base (1cff140) 77.93% compared to head (4320779) 78.12%.

Additional details and impacted files ```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## master #460 +/- ## ========================================== + Coverage 77.93% 78.12% +0.19% ========================================== Files 23 23 Lines 3155 3155 ========================================== + Hits 2459 2465 +6 + Misses 696 690 -6 ```

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

ArnoStrouwen commented 9 months ago

In my PR, the CI fails for both regular and downgrade CI: https://github.com/SciML/Surrogates.jl/pull/459 The failure is thus not related to an old version of something, but just a test that is random?

I would put the flux compat to both 0.13 and 0.14. But if that turns out not to be possible, we will have to bump other packages also, which will then cause even more packages to need a bump and so on.

The lower bound versions for downgrade CI are tedious to set up, but I'm quite experienced at it now, so I can do that part, as long as the random test result is fixed here.

sathvikbhagavan commented 9 months ago

Yes, random test failures should be fixed