Use scipy's convolve for snip1d
#630
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
According to the [scipy documentation](https://docs.scipy.org/doc/scipy/reference/generated/scipy.signal.convolve.html#scipy.signal.convolve), convolve will automatically pick which method to use depending on which method it thinks will be faster. We were forcing it to use `fftconvolve` before, which, for our example, took about 1.588 seconds to run. Switching to `convolve` now takes about 0.468 seconds instead, so it is noticeably faster. In our example, the final snip1d result had a max difference of `2.6e-13` compared to using `fftconvolve`, so it appears to have a minimal impact on the results. Signed-off-by: Patrick Avery <patrick.avery@kitware.com>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
According to the scipy documentation,
convolvewill automatically pick which method to use depending on which method it thinks will be faster.We were forcing it to use
fftconvolvebefore, which, for our example, took about 1.588 seconds to run. Switching toconvolvenow takes about 0.468 seconds instead, so it is noticeably faster.In our example, the final snip1d result had a max difference of
2.6e-13compared to usingfftconvolve, so it appears to have a minimal impact on the results.