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

Faster dti odf #1064

Merged
merged 8 commits into from Oct 31, 2016
Merged

Faster dti odf #1064

merged 8 commits into from Oct 31, 2016

Conversation

arokem
Copy link
Contributor

@arokem arokem commented May 27, 2016

Speeds up DTI odf calculation, by calculating it only over regions of the volume that have non-zero eigen-values.

@arokem
Copy link
Contributor Author

arokem commented May 27, 2016

This saves a little bit of time for the case in scratch/profile_dti.py:

this branch: 48.5043 s
master: 57.4576 s

But should save substantially more time when a mask is used.

@arokem
Copy link
Contributor Author

arokem commented Oct 21, 2016

This one is also an easy review: <40 lines of changed code for a 12% speedup for something that some users probably do 20 times a day. Any one want to take a look?

@MarcCote
Copy link
Contributor

LGTM. It avoids divisions by zero and simplifies the code.

@arokem
Copy link
Contributor Author

arokem commented Oct 21, 2016

Thanks for taking a look. Now also rebased for ease of merging.

@MarcCote
Copy link
Contributor

@arokem : it seems the rebase went wrong?

@arokem
Copy link
Contributor Author

arokem commented Oct 26, 2016

Looks like Travis was having a hard time connecting to Github. I just repushed that last commit.

@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented Oct 26, 2016

Current coverage is 84.61% (diff: 100%)

Merging #1064 into master will increase coverage by 3.74%

@@             master      #1064   diff @@
==========================================
  Files           217        219      +2   
  Lines         24593      24879    +286   
  Methods           0          0           
  Messages          0          0           
  Branches       2491       2515     +24   
==========================================
+ Hits          19888      21051   +1163   
+ Misses         4194       3199    -995   
- Partials        511        629    +118   

Powered by Codecov. Last update da31980...58532e6

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage decreased (-0.01%) to 82.925% when pulling 67b349f on arokem:faster-dti-odf into da31980 on nipy:master.

1 similar comment
@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage decreased (-0.01%) to 82.925% when pulling 67b349f on arokem:faster-dti-odf into da31980 on nipy:master.

@MarcCote
Copy link
Contributor

@arokem: Should I wait for you to add a small test that actually uses the mask (see codecov)?

@arokem
Copy link
Contributor Author

arokem commented Oct 27, 2016

oh yeah - thats no good. please wait. ill get to it in the weekend, i hope

On Oct 26, 2016 2:19 PM, "Marc-Alexandre Côté" notifications@github.com
wrote:

@arokem https://github.com/arokem: Should I wait for you to add a small
test that actually uses the mask (see codecov)?


You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#1064 (comment), or mute
the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAHPNhnpdK5Ml7mFkjmr2woxUPyGJwiXks5q35mngaJpZM4Io3Kv
.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+4.2%) to 87.121% when pulling 03ebcd5 on arokem:faster-dti-odf into da31980 on nipy:master.

@arokem
Copy link
Contributor Author

arokem commented Oct 31, 2016

How about this? On my machine, the dti module is currently at 99% coverage.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+4.2%) to 87.142% when pulling 615283e on arokem:faster-dti-odf into da31980 on nipy:master.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+4.2%) to 87.142% when pulling 58532e6 on arokem:faster-dti-odf into da31980 on nipy:master.

@MarcCote
Copy link
Contributor

Excellent!

@MarcCote MarcCote merged commit 710fdc4 into dipy:master Oct 31, 2016
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

4 participants