NIFTy merge requestshttps://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests2023-08-07T09:30:56Zhttps://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/859Update gitlab-ci to un-deprecated global variables2023-08-07T09:30:56ZGordian EdenhoferUpdate gitlab-ci to un-deprecated global variablesGordian EdenhoferGordian Edenhoferhttps://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/858Gaussian lh for complex data2023-07-31T15:23:11ZJakob RothGaussian lh for complex dataAs done in VC Gaussian, use vdot to compute the sum of squared residuals.
@gedenhof Shouldn't there be a cast to real numbers? By just using vdot the result is still complex with negligible imaginary part.As done in VC Gaussian, use vdot to compute the sum of squared residuals.
@gedenhof Shouldn't there be a cast to real numbers? By just using vdot the result is still complex with negligible imaginary part.https://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/857Rethink Fields and Sampling2023-08-30T04:40:07ZGordian EdenhoferRethink Fields and SamplingChange two core principles: Transform the NIFTy.re's `Field` class into a simpler `Vector` class and harmonize the sampling to always work with stacked samples instead of list of samples.Change two core principles: Transform the NIFTy.re's `Field` class into a simpler `Vector` class and harmonize the sampling to always work with stacked samples instead of list of samples.Gordian EdenhoferGordian Edenhoferhttps://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/856Switch to debain:bullseye-slim for CI2023-06-16T10:13:05ZPhilipp FrankSwitch to debain:bullseye-slim for CIPhilipp FrankPhilipp Frankhttps://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/855add hashing for MPI equality check for fields in optimize_kl2023-06-16T09:36:03ZJakob Knollmuelleradd hashing for MPI equality check for fields in optimize_klchecking MPI equality of large fields explicitly can crash and lead to segmentation faults, that's why we introduced the possibility to just compare hashes. We didn't add it to the check in the `_single_value_sample_list` in optimize_kl....checking MPI equality of large fields explicitly can crash and lead to segmentation faults, that's why we introduced the possibility to just compare hashes. We didn't add it to the check in the `_single_value_sample_list` in optimize_kl.py and I run into an issue there.https://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/854Draft: Gauss markov processes2023-05-24T10:22:18ZVincent EberleDraft: Gauss markov processes@pfrank I also added the IWPProcess from Resolve and added P.Arras as author.
The interface is not the same, but I tried to extend it a bit to be able to use it for the spectral models.
If you have time for a short review, that would be...@pfrank I also added the IWPProcess from Resolve and added P.Arras as author.
The interface is not the same, but I tried to extend it a bit to be able to use it for the spectral models.
If you have time for a short review, that would be great.
PS: There is no rush to merge this soon.Vincent EberleVincent Eberlehttps://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/853Fix nifty.re "sample_evi" docstring2023-06-05T20:53:21ZJakob RothFix nifty.re "sample_evi" docstringfix "sample_evi" docstring in "kl.py".fix "sample_evi" docstring in "kl.py".Gordian EdenhoferGordian Edenhoferhttps://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/852Extract values form field at given indices2023-06-12T08:13:19ZJakob RothExtract values form field at given indicesExtracts values from a field at given indices and puts them into an unstructured field. Useful when some indices appear twice (e.g. several measurements at the same location).Extracts values from a field at given indices and puts them into an unstructured field. Useful when some indices appear twice (e.g. several measurements at the same location).Philipp FrankPhilipp Frankhttps://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/851Rethink NIFTy.re.Field (Field -> Vector)2023-07-04T16:36:39ZGordian EdenhoferRethink NIFTy.re.Field (Field -> Vector)Gordian EdenhoferGordian Edenhoferhttps://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/850Rethink sampling2023-07-04T16:45:50ZGordian EdenhoferRethink samplingGive more control over how to map the drawing of samples to the user. In doing so restructure the way minimization works.Give more control over how to map the drawing of samples to the user. In doing so restructure the way minimization works.Gordian EdenhoferGordian Edenhoferhttps://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/849OperatorAdapter.jax_expr: Fix casting in recent JAX2023-05-02T14:31:08ZGordian EdenhoferOperatorAdapter.jax_expr: Fix casting in recent JAXGordian EdenhoferGordian Edenhoferhttps://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/848Fix potential color rendering error in multifrequency plotting2023-05-09T16:38:01ZLukas PlatzFix potential color rendering error in multifrequency plottingWhile refactoring the multifrequency plotting, I think I discoverd an error in the wavelength-color mapping.
To test the routine, I created an mf image in which each column contains contribution from only one wavelength. Below are imag...While refactoring the multifrequency plotting, I think I discoverd an error in the wavelength-color mapping.
To test the routine, I created an mf image in which each column contains contribution from only one wavelength. Below are images how the nifty plotting routine in the current `NIFTy_8` branch renders this image ("original") and how my (supposedly) fixed routine does ("new_fixed").
![original](/uploads/91f9a2b3ac0d3fbe3d17c69d9a0a8db8/original.png)
![new_fixed](/uploads/e5dbe3706f7e6b12734eebacb9f6bec5/new_fixed.png)
I expect a test image like described to be rendered into the familiar rainbow colors known of visualizations of the visibible light spectrum, but the original RGB mapping instead produces some red, lots of yellow, some turquise, and lots of violet.
The problem seems to be that the original routine first applies the rgb mapping and *then* the logarithmic "sensitivity" correction, while it should be the other way around. The source branch of this MR contains the code producing the "new_fixed" output.
@mtr @pfrank What do you think? Was the original behavior desireable, or is the new behavior better? I lean towards the latter, if our goal is to map spectral data to the visible spectrum without color distortion.https://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/847Draft: Multi-Frequency and `HPSpace` Plotting refactor2023-05-09T16:38:04ZLukas PlatzDraft: Multi-Frequency and `HPSpace` Plotting refactorHi @pfrank @mtr @wmarg @veberle,
since I promised Margret to make the multifrequency plotting routine improvements created for the Fermi paper available for general usage, I took two days to refactor the multifrequency plotting routines...Hi @pfrank @mtr @wmarg @veberle,
since I promised Margret to make the multifrequency plotting routine improvements created for the Fermi paper available for general usage, I took two days to refactor the multifrequency plotting routines of NIFTy.
Following the philosophy of "`nifty.Plot()` is only a rough helper, not supposed to be all-powerful", I extracted the multifrequency-to-RGB conversion into a separate class and polished its interfaces, such that people can use it in their own plotting routines.
As Philipp Arras and Vincent Eberle had created a helper to also support Hammer projections (alongside Mollweide) a while ago, I took the sphere-to-2d projection functionality out of `nifty.Plot()` into a separate function, that now supports both Mollweide and Hammer projection. It is now also usable in external plotting scripts.
I have added docstrings and a few tests for new functionality.
Also, I think I discoverd a bug in the multifrequency color mapping - a corresponding merge request into this branch follows in a second.
@mtr: As I belive you to be the original author of the mf to rgb mapping, could you maybe/please have a look if I made any stupid mistakes?Philipp FrankPhilipp Frankhttps://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/846Import `TransposeOperator` into NIFTy namespace2023-04-17T07:33:09ZLukas PlatzImport `TransposeOperator` into NIFTy namespaceFor some reason the openly documented `TransposeOperator` is not imported into the NIFTy namespace.
I suspect this is an oversight, therefore this merge request.For some reason the openly documented `TransposeOperator` is not imported into the NIFTy namespace.
I suspect this is an oversight, therefore this merge request.https://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/845Fix pipeline2023-03-17T17:58:30ZGordian EdenhoferFix pipelineGordian EdenhoferGordian Edenhoferhttps://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/844Fix the NIFTy pipeline2023-03-17T17:00:40ZGordian EdenhoferFix the NIFTy pipelineGordian EdenhoferGordian Edenhoferhttps://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/843Various small tweaks2023-05-01T18:56:19ZGordian EdenhoferVarious small tweaksGordian EdenhoferGordian Edenhoferhttps://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/842Introduce a more flexible sequential map2023-05-02T13:50:13ZGordian EdenhoferIntroduce a more flexible sequential mapGordian EdenhoferGordian Edenhoferhttps://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/841Test less2023-03-17T16:58:11ZGordian EdenhoferTest lessPhilipp FrankPhilipp Frankhttps://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/840Reintroduce `plt.figure()` to protect user figures from closing2023-02-22T14:11:28ZLukas PlatzReintroduce `plt.figure()` to protect user figures from closingPhilipp FrankPhilipp Frank