Fixing integrability opcards

[andreab1997]

We realized that the opcards for the integrability grids were wrongly generated by pineko. In particular the point in targetgrid was not contained in the interpolation_x_grid list.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #41 (d0c18fb) into main (707f21f) will decrease coverage by 0.37%.
The diff coverage is 0.00%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main      #41      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   44.53%   44.16%   -0.38%     
==========================================
  Files          15       15              
  Lines         595      600       +5     
==========================================
  Hits          265      265              
- Misses        330      335       +5     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	44.16% <0.00%> (-0.38%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
src/pineko/cli/opcard.py	84.61% <ø> (ø)
src/pineko/evolve.py	27.77% <0.00%> (-2.84%)	⬇️

[felixhekhorn]

• I would appreciate if your commit message contains more information then just "Fixing" 🙃 e.g. "Add int parameter to API" or "Propagate integrability info" or whatever ;-)
• if this fix is doing the trick - I'm happy to merge for now ...

for the future we may however reconsider:

• writing unit tests (if you have some spare time now, even do it now)
• and we should make ourselves aware, that this behaviour indeed relies on float arithmetic, which is potentially dangerous
  • because the way we're hacking it, we're relying on the fact that EKO will return an identity and hence we can get away with what ever xgrid ...
  • to be specific this relies on the fact that the number here https://github.com/NNPDF/runcards/blob/3a5b7c9dc053707bb74d181c69b5add50c5a385f/pinecards/NNPDF_INTEG_XT3_40/integrability.yaml#L4 is inside float equality equal to Q0^2 in the theory card (which is even outside our scope)

[andreab1997]

• I would appreciate if your commit message contains more information then just "Fixing" 🙃 e.g. "Add int parameter to API" or "Propagate integrability info" or whatever ;-)

Yes sorry but they were just some minor stuff I forgot.

• if this fix is doing the trick - I'm happy to merge for now ...

I am testing now

[andreab1997]

• I would appreciate if your commit message contains more information then just "Fixing" 🙃 e.g. "Add int parameter to API" or "Propagate integrability info" or whatever ;-)

Yes sorry but they were just some minor stuff I forgot.

• if this fix is doing the trick - I'm happy to merge for now ...

I am testing now

Ok I can confirm it works, should I merge? @felixhekhorn

[felixhekhorn]

actually, inside the theory command we should determine the "integrability-property" from the grid - those grids have a marker: the integrability_version

[felixhekhorn]

actually, inside the theory command we should determine the "integrability-property" from the grid - those grids have a marker: the integrability_version

I guess this works even for the file based API since at opcard generation time you need to have a grid present

[andreab1997]

actually, inside the theory command we should determine the "integrability-property" from the grid - those grids have a marker: the integrability_version

Right, this seems a better solution than asking for a flag

[felixhekhorn]

I like short PRs ;-)

[andreab1997]

@scarlehoff is this ok to merge for you?