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

Support for bounds, initial guess, and threhold inputs #90

Open
wants to merge 5 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

IvanARashid
Copy link
Contributor

Went through each standardized algorithm and checked/added support for bounds, initial guesses, and thresholds where applicable.

Additionally, the algorithms now have the following boolean attributes which can be used to filter algorithms in testing.
supported_bounds
supported_initial_guess
supported_thresholds

Copy link
Collaborator

@oliverchampion oliverchampion left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If we get this merged, the unit testing from my merge may help verify the bounds are properly implemented :)

@@ -27,6 +27,11 @@ class ETP_SRI_LinearFitting(OsipiBase):
required_initial_guess_optional = False
accepted_dimensions = 1
# Not sure how to define this for the number of accepted dimensions. Perhaps like the thresholds, at least and at most?

# Supported inputs in the standardized class
supported_bounds = False
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't understand how these are used.
Are these now properties of the class that I can ask using self.supported_bounds? That would help with testing :)

@@ -27,6 +27,11 @@ class PvH_KB_NKI_IVIMfit(OsipiBase):
required_initial_guess_optional =False
accepted_dimensions = 1 # Not sure how to define this for the number of accepted dimensions. Perhaps like the thresholds, at least and at most?

# Supported inputs in the standardized class
supported_bounds = False
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Do we need to ask authors to double check whether these booleans are correct for their methods?

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.

2 participants