Skip to content
GitLab
Explore
Sign in
Primary navigation
Search or go to…
Project
N
NIFTy
Manage
Activity
Members
Labels
Plan
Issues
Issue boards
Milestones
Code
Merge requests
Repository
Branches
Commits
Tags
Repository graph
Compare revisions
Build
Pipelines
Jobs
Pipeline schedules
Artifacts
Deploy
Releases
Container registry
Model registry
Monitor
Service Desk
Analyze
Value stream analytics
Contributor analytics
CI/CD analytics
Repository analytics
Model experiments
Help
Help
Support
GitLab documentation
Compare GitLab plans
Community forum
Contribute to GitLab
Provide feedback
Keyboard shortcuts
?
Snippets
Groups
Projects
Show more breadcrumbs
ift
NIFTy
Commits
cc80cd29
Commit
cc80cd29
authored
5 years ago
by
Martin Reinecke
Browse files
Options
Downloads
Plain Diff
merge
parents
4b4cc05b
83feda90
Branches
Branches containing commit
Tags
Tags containing commit
1 merge request
!387
Remove standard MPI parallelization
Pipeline
#65062
passed
5 years ago
Stage: build_docker
Stage: test
Stage: demo_runs
Changes
1
Pipelines
1
Hide whitespace changes
Inline
Side-by-side
Showing
1 changed file
ChangeLog
+18
-0
18 additions, 0 deletions
ChangeLog
with
18 additions
and
0 deletions
ChangeLog
+
18
−
0
View file @
cc80cd29
Changes since NIFTy 5:
Changes since NIFTy 5:
Updates regarding correlated fields
===================================
The most commonly used model for homogeneous and isotropic correlated fields in
nifty5 has been `SLAmplitude` combined with `CorrelatedField`. This model
exhibits unintuitive couplings between its parameters and as been replaced
by `CorrelatedFieldMaker` in NIFTy 6. This model aims to conceptionally provide
the same functionality. However, internally it works quite differently. Therefore,
specific classes for `SLAmplitude` like `LogRGSpace`, `QHTOperator`, `ExpTransform`,
`SlopeOperator`, `SymmetrizingOperator`, `CepstrumOperator`, `CorrelatedField`
and `MfCorrelatedField` are not needed anymore and have been removed. In general,
`CorrelatedFieldMaker` feels to be better conditioned leading to faster convergence
but it is hard to make explicit tests since the two approaches cannot be mapped
onto each other exactly. We experienced that preconditioning in the `MetricGaussianKL`
via `napprox` breaks the inference scheme with the new model so `napprox` may not
be used here.
Removal of the standard parallelization scheme:
Removal of the standard parallelization scheme:
===============================================
===============================================
...
@@ -19,3 +36,4 @@ User-visible changes:
...
@@ -19,3 +36,4 @@ User-visible changes:
replaced by a single function called `makeField`
replaced by a single function called `makeField`
- the property `local_shape` has been removed from `Domain` (and subclasses)
- the property `local_shape` has been removed from `Domain` (and subclasses)
and `DomainTuple`.
and `DomainTuple`.
This diff is collapsed.
Click to expand it.
Preview
0%
Loading
Try again
or
attach a new file
.
Cancel
You are about to add
0
people
to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Save comment
Cancel
Please
register
or
sign in
to comment