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

Add faster Gamma #387

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Apr 10, 2024
Merged

Add faster Gamma #387

merged 4 commits into from
Apr 10, 2024

Conversation

rohanbabbar04
Copy link
Contributor

Description

  • Add class Gamma with all methods
  • Add test in test_scipy.py.
  • Update docs

Checklist

  • Code style is correct (follows pylint and black guidelines)
  • Includes new or updated tests to cover the new feature
  • New features are properly documented (with an example if appropriate)

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 94.79167% with 5 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 81.68%. Comparing base (a7887ea) to head (7d9bfe0).
Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Files Patch % Lines
preliz/distributions/gamma.py 94.73% 5 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #387      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   83.66%   81.68%   -1.99%     
==========================================
  Files          64       68       +4     
  Lines        5842     6175     +333     
==========================================
+ Hits         4888     5044     +156     
- Misses        954     1131     +177     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@rohanbabbar04
Copy link
Contributor Author

One of my test in test_maxent is failing, I have commented it as of now

Any idea why is this happening?

preliz/tests/test_maxent.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
preliz/distributions/gamma.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
preliz/distributions/gamma.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@aloctavodia
Copy link
Contributor

The expression for the entropy was not correct, although it could return values close to the correct ones.

@rohanbabbar04
Copy link
Contributor Author

The expression for the entropy was not correct, although it could return values close to the correct ones.

Thanks, noted I forgot we have digamma already implemented in our preliz.internal.special

@aloctavodia aloctavodia merged commit be7060f into arviz-devs:main Apr 10, 2024
3 checks passed
@rohanbabbar04 rohanbabbar04 deleted the gamma branch April 10, 2024 16:44
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.

None yet

3 participants