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

Only compute Jacobian in RLM if last step success #303

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 17, 2023

Conversation

Affie
Copy link
Contributor

@Affie Affie commented Oct 12, 2023

The estimate lms.p is only updated on a successful step, therefore a Jacobian is not needed if the last step failed.
This PR skips updating the Jacobian if the last step failed.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 12, 2023

Codecov Report

Merging #303 (6d29ba4) into master (c4bc49d) will increase coverage by 0.01%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #303      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   99.74%   99.76%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files          77       77              
  Lines        7087     7089       +2     
==========================================
+ Hits         7069     7072       +3     
+ Misses         18       17       -1     
Files Coverage Δ
src/plans/nonlinear_least_squares_plan.jl 100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/solvers/LevenbergMarquardt.jl 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes

📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more

Copy link
Member

@mateuszbaran mateuszbaran left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM. We could avoid recomputing of a few more things in case of a rejected step (grad_f_c and lms.X) but that should be less important.

Copy link
Member

@kellertuer kellertuer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I am fine with this as well.
Is this urgent? Then we could register a version with this, otherwise I would just wait for the JuMP interface to also finish?

@Affie
Copy link
Contributor Author

Affie commented Oct 17, 2023

No, tagging is not urgent as I can work on the master branch locally and CI will still pass as it's only a performance enhancement.

@kellertuer
Copy link
Member

Ok, nice, I'll merge it to master and it will be part of the next release.

@kellertuer kellertuer merged commit d6acf64 into JuliaManifolds:master Oct 17, 2023
13 checks passed
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 this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants