-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 8
Re-enable BackTracking
#1761
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
Re-enable BackTracking
#1761
Conversation
|
Since the sensible gradients don't fix the Crystal model with BackTracking, I guess we should not enable that yet? How do these gradients compare with Shampine's advice in #1705 (comment), should we bring that back as well in this PR? |
|
I added Shampine's advice, but it doesn't seem to change anything |
| get_du, | ||
| AbstractNLSolver, | ||
| relax!, | ||
| _compute_rhs!, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I guess we may be able to stop using this internal function when we upstream this?
BackTracking
visr
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Very nice find!
BackTrackingas relaxation is now enabled again, with a thin wrapper to reject it when the residual gets worse. Upstream issue:SciML/OrdinaryDiffEq.jl#2442