Closed ariapoy closed 3 years ago
Hi @ariapoy,
Thank you so much for submitting this PR.
There is one thing I would like to make sure, the change of test_hs_active_selecting
, test_hs_active_selecting
, and test_hs_random_selecting
is because of Fixed a bug in datasets.load_iris which had two wrong data points, right?
Thanks. Yao-Yuan
Hi @yangarbiter,
Yes! Change of sklearn.dataset.load_iris
affect test_hs_active_selecting
, test_hs_active_selecting
, and test_hs_random_selecting
in sklearn==0.20
.
Merging #188 (35e82ae) into master (2432b51) will increase coverage by
0.12%
. The diff coverage is100.00%
.
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #188 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 89.47% 89.60% +0.12%
==========================================
Files 37 37
Lines 1568 1597 +29
==========================================
+ Hits 1403 1431 +28
- Misses 165 166 +1
Impacted Files | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
libact/query_strategies/multiclass/mdsp.py | 78.76% <100.00%> (ø) |
|
libact/utils/__init__.py | 77.27% <0.00%> (-4.55%) |
:arrow_down: |
libact/labelers/ideal_labeler.py | 100.00% <0.00%> (ø) |
|
libact/query_strategies/random_sampling.py | 100.00% <0.00%> (ø) |
|
...query_strategies/multilabel/binary_minimization.py | 100.00% <0.00%> (ø) |
|
..._strategies/multilabel/adaptive_active_learning.py | 100.00% <0.00%> (ø) |
|
.../multiclass/active_learning_with_cost_embedding.py | 100.00% <0.00%> (ø) |
|
...trategies/density_weighted_uncertainty_sampling.py | 98.71% <0.00%> (+0.01%) |
:arrow_up: |
..._strategies/multilabel/maximum_margin_reduction.py | 97.82% <0.00%> (+0.04%) |
:arrow_up: |
...ery_strategies/multiclass/hierarchical_sampling.py | 95.90% <0.00%> (+0.04%) |
:arrow_up: |
... and 10 more |
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact)
,ø = not affected
,? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 2432b51...35e82ae. Read the comment docs.
https://github.com/ntucllab/libact/pull/188/checks?check_run_id=3258702214 It appears that sklearn > 0.24 is not installable on python 2.7, maybe we should also consider dropping support for python 2.7.
https://github.com/ntucllab/libact/pull/188/checks?check_run_id=3258702214 It appears that sklearn > 0.24 is not installable on python 2.7, maybe we should also consider dropping support for python 2.7.
@yangarbiter Agree! Follow Warning Scikit-learn 0.20 was the last version to support Python 2.7. We could drop support for Python 2.7.
Sorry for forgetting to notify you that I just test Ubuntu:20.04 with default Python 3.8. I notice the FAIL in ubuntu-latest, 3.9 during CI checking. I'll check it later.
Thanks!
https://github.com/ntucllab/libact/pull/188/checks?check_run_id=3258702214 It appears that sklearn > 0.24 is not installable on python 2.7, maybe we should also consider dropping support for python 2.7.
@yangarbiter Agree! Follow Warning Scikit-learn 0.20 was the last version to support Python 2.7. We could drop support for Python 2.7.
Sorry for forgetting to notify you that I just test Ubuntu:20.04 with default Python 3.8. Does it work?
I notice the FAIL in ubuntu-latest, 3.9 during CI checking. I'll check it later.
Thanks!
Libact linting / build (ubuntu-latest, 3.9) (pull_request)
this one should fail, which is fine since this is coding style check.
I'll try to fix them (you could also help if you want) after this PR is merged.
Reference Issues/PRs
No.
What does this implement/fix? Explain your changes.
When upgrading to sklearn==0.24.2, it occurs five FAILs during
python setup.py test
.Any other comments?