Skip to content

Synchronize feature branch - #231

Merged
jared321 merged 67 commits into
154Documentationfrom
main
Jul 16, 2026
Merged

Synchronize feature branch#231
jared321 merged 67 commits into
154Documentationfrom
main

Conversation

@jared321

@jared321 jared321 commented Jul 6, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

main has been updated since this branch was based off of it.

jared321 and others added 21 commits June 22, 2026 16:22
Now the configuration is not tied just to MH.  This percolated throughout the
test script code so that we open the door to testing LMC and PTLMC.

Test script ran through with no issues and the unit tests run through cleanly as
well.
The results do not look good and I don't see any parameters for me to adjust.
This fits with the fact that LMC is currently listed as research grade.  This
second set of tests fail because the sampler cannot yet be made deterministic.
That will be done on a later branch.
Homogenize the argument list of PTLMC with that of other samplers.  My test
execution fails due to an array sizing issues I suspect.  Moses should first
update this test setup to see if it's any good and then check the error.
Synchornize feature branch to main
I was able to establish LMC and PTLMC benchmarks with these changes.
@jared321 jared321 self-assigned this Jul 6, 2026
jared321 added 8 commits July 8, 2026 12:03
This is the first step in updating the sampler interface.  In the interest of
minimizing the changes to the calibrators, this set of changes is intentionally
only a partial step in that upgrade.

This uncovered a potential issue in test_cal_samplers that required removing the
testing of PTLMC.  Moses will look into this before this branch is merged into
main.

MH, LMC, and PTLMC testing showed bitwise identical sampler results as expected.
The unit tests are passing with PTLMC removed as detailed above.
…lers.

These are, again, intermediate steps in the overall process of improving the
sampler interface.

unit tests and direct sampler tests still passing.  Docs are rendering.
Ideally that section will be redone with a more modern procedure for using a
user-provided sampler.
The docs are rough/wrong and the code isn't using any of this yet.
These changes would make comparing diffs unnecessarily hard for the PR review.
jared321 and others added 28 commits July 10, 2026 12:37
(1) Ensure that no surmise RNG is used except within test functions
(2) Reduce redundancy in calling shared variables from shared_scenario.py
(3) Allow for fixtures to be called by test to ensure "no_rng" (RNG cleared), "seeded_RNG" (surmise RNG set properly)
As expected, the new results were not identical to the benchmark.  However, the
new results look reasonable.
Random draws not using the global RNG.  Internal tests probably shouldn't
override the underlying failure message, but rather only print more information
to help understand the context of the failure.

This should hopefully get actions passing again.
@jared321
jared321 merged commit 469684a into 154Documentation Jul 16, 2026
60 of 61 checks passed
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