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 PetabProblem class for handling PEtab-defined simulation con… #2255

Merged
merged 15 commits into from
Jan 16, 2024

Conversation

dweindl
Copy link
Member

@dweindl dweindl commented Jan 3, 2024

…ditions

Makes it a bit easier to work with PEtab problems interactively or when implementing some PEtab-based objective function (#962).

@dweindl dweindl self-assigned this Jan 3, 2024
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 3, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: 8 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (f16a4ab) 77.04% compared to head (c8609c3) 77.16%.

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop    #2255      +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage    77.04%   77.16%   +0.11%     
===========================================
  Files           92       94       +2     
  Lines        14987    15085      +98     
===========================================
+ Hits         11547    11640      +93     
- Misses        3440     3445       +5     
Flag Coverage Δ
cpp 74.02% <ø> (ø)
cpp_python 37.36% <ø> (ø)
petab 53.97% <91.83%> (+1.07%) ⬆️
python 76.98% <0.00%> (-0.92%) ⬇️
sbmlsuite ?

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

Files Coverage Δ
python/sdist/amici/petab/conditions.py 97.43% <ø> (+0.85%) ⬆️
python/tests/petab/test_petab_problem.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
python/sdist/amici/petab/petab_problem.py 87.69% <87.69%> (ø)

... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes

…ditions

Makes it a bit easier to work with PEtab problems interactively or when implementing some PEtab-based objective function (AMICI-dev#962).
@dweindl dweindl force-pushed the amici_petab_problem branch from 596a372 to f2f0d12 Compare January 7, 2024 14:08
@dweindl dweindl marked this pull request as ready for review January 9, 2024 11:55
@dweindl dweindl requested a review from a team as a code owner January 9, 2024 11:55
@dweindl dweindl force-pushed the amici_petab_problem branch from 2a4d2ab to 9ab1463 Compare January 16, 2024 08:51
@dweindl dweindl changed the title Add AmiciPetabProblem class for handling PEtab-defined simulation con… Add PetabProblem class for handling PEtab-defined simulation con… Jan 16, 2024
Copy link
Member

@FFroehlich FFroehlich left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

👍

"scaled_parameters=True in combination with default "
"parameters is not implemented yet."
)
scaled_parameters = False
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

remove?

python/sdist/amici/petab/petab_problem.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
from .parameter_mapping import create_parameter_mapping


class PetabProblem:
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

why is codecov not reporting any coverage here?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Oops. Because I started putting tests in a separate PEtab directory which was not included in the pytest invocation.

@dweindl dweindl merged commit 2f7aaf4 into AMICI-dev:develop Jan 16, 2024
20 checks passed
@dweindl dweindl deleted the amici_petab_problem branch January 16, 2024 17:18
@dweindl dweindl mentioned this pull request Sep 28, 2024
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