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

Replace LevMarLSQFitter with TRFLSQFitter #1180

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Oct 8, 2024
Merged

Conversation

pllim
Copy link
Member

@pllim pllim commented Oct 7, 2024

@pllim pllim added the fitting Issues dealing with fitting of lines (or other spectral features) label Oct 7, 2024
pllim added 2 commits October 7, 2024 16:07
because we are using a different fitter now.
Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 7, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 86.86%. Comparing base (becfe37) to head (329b2b4).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #1180   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   86.86%   86.86%           
=======================================
  Files          63       63           
  Lines        4553     4553           
=======================================
  Hits         3955     3955           
  Misses        598      598           

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

@pllim pllim marked this pull request as ready for review October 7, 2024 20:37
Copy link
Contributor

@keflavich keflavich left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm. Could you confirm that those numerical changes were caused by switching default fitter?

@pllim
Copy link
Member Author

pllim commented Oct 8, 2024

Could you confirm that those numerical changes were caused by switching default fitter?

How should I do that? That is the only change and then the numbers change. Not sure what else I can do. Hope you can advise. Thanks.

@keflavich
Copy link
Contributor

That's pretty much all I was asking. I don't see any other differences. I would like to know what these changes imply about the absolute accuracy of the two methods, or perhaps about their default tolerances, but that desire shouldn't hold back merging this.

@pllim
Copy link
Member Author

pllim commented Oct 8, 2024

@astrofrog did astropy/astropy#16983 so maybe he can explain. I am just propagating that recommendation downstream. 🙏

@astrofrog
Copy link
Member

The differences here seem pretty small considering it is a completely different fitting algorithm. Note that TRFLSQFitter does have calc_uncertainties which you can use to find the uncertainties so it would be interesting to try this to see if the differences are indeed within the uncertainties.

@pllim
Copy link
Member Author

pllim commented Oct 8, 2024

I'll leave that exercise for the future but I am uncertain who will do it. 😏

Thanks, all! Merging.

@pllim pllim merged commit 67bea40 into astropy:main Oct 8, 2024
12 checks passed
@pllim pllim deleted the replace-fitter branch October 8, 2024 14:42
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
fitting Issues dealing with fitting of lines (or other spectral features)
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Replace LevMarLSQFitter with something else?
3 participants