NIFTy merge requestshttps://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests2020-03-26T09:05:03Zhttps://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/432Use a generator for MetricGaussianKL.samples2020-03-26T09:05:03ZMartin ReineckeUse a generator for MetricGaussianKL.samples@gedenhof what do you think? Please feel free to improve this.@gedenhof what do you think? Please feel free to improve this.https://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/431metric_gaussian_kl.py: Fix samples property2020-03-25T14:41:05ZGordian Edenhofermetric_gaussian_kl.py: Fix samples propertyFix a bug which was introduced in eded7903fb making it impossible to
access the sample property of a KL with mirrored samples as a list can
not be added to a tuple in python.Fix a bug which was introduced in eded7903fb making it impossible to
access the sample property of a KL with mirrored samples as a list can
not be added to a tuple in python.https://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/429Fix KL2020-03-25T14:42:20ZMartin ReineckeFix KLI think I made a stupid mistake when I merged the MPI KL with the normal one...
@parras, @reimar, could you please double check?
(The new KL does not store the mirrored samples to save space, and in the MPI case, a mirrored sample ...I think I made a stupid mistake when I merged the MPI KL with the normal one...
@parras, @reimar, could you please double check?
(The new KL does not store the mirrored samples to save space, and in the MPI case, a mirrored sample pair always sits on exactly one task.)
Unfortunately, this is not the bug which caused the recent breakage ...https://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/427Linearization logic fixups2020-03-24T11:00:31ZPhilipp Arrasparras@mpa-garching.mpg.deLinearization logic fixupsMartin ReineckeMartin Reineckehttps://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/426Be more paranoid about initializing the RNG2020-03-24T11:25:14ZMartin ReineckeBe more paranoid about initializing the RNGThis is an attempt to enforce reproducible runs. Whenever `from_random` is called without a preceding `random.init()`, an exception will be raised.
@parras, does this look OK in principle?
I also realized that there are still some ...This is an attempt to enforce reproducible runs. Whenever `from_random` is called without a preceding `random.init()`, an exception will be raised.
@parras, does this look OK in principle?
I also realized that there are still some direct calls to `np.random` functionality within `nifty6`, which I think is bad. We should replace this soon.Martin ReineckeMartin Reineckehttps://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/425Fixups2020-03-17T07:44:56ZPhilipp Arrasparras@mpa-garching.mpg.deFixups@lerou is that fine with you?@lerou is that fine with you?https://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/423Metric and jacobian fixups2020-03-15T08:26:04ZPhilipp Arrasparras@mpa-garching.mpg.deMetric and jacobian fixups@mtr, ready to be merged@mtr, ready to be mergedhttps://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/422Add forgotten test2020-03-11T22:39:14ZPhilipp Arrasparras@mpa-garching.mpg.deAdd forgotten testhttps://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/421added the one_over method to MutliField2020-03-11T21:45:59ZReimar H Leikeadded the one_over method to MutliFieldall methods should be consistent between Field and `MultiField`.
The `one_over` method is also necessary for our eht-imaging code.all methods should be consistent between Field and `MultiField`.
The `one_over` method is also necessary for our eht-imaging code.Philipp Arrasparras@mpa-garching.mpg.dePhilipp Arrasparras@mpa-garching.mpg.dehttps://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/419Uniform operator2020-03-15T08:39:59ZRouven LemmerzUniform operatorThis implements a `UniformOperator`, which generates a Uniform distribution.
Also, this fixes the `_InterpolationOperator` to allow for different `table_funcs` than logarithm, which lead to a wrong jacobian beforehand.This implements a `UniformOperator`, which generates a Uniform distribution.
Also, this fixes the `_InterpolationOperator` to allow for different `table_funcs` than logarithm, which lead to a wrong jacobian beforehand.https://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/417Performance pa2020-03-27T13:03:57ZPhilipp Arrasparras@mpa-garching.mpg.dePerformance pahttps://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/416Inverse gamma2020-03-09T12:18:23ZPhilipp Arrasparras@mpa-garching.mpg.deInverse gammaMartin ReineckeMartin Reineckehttps://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/415CorrelatedFieldMaker: offset parametrization in one place2020-04-01T15:32:22ZLukas PlatzCorrelatedFieldMaker: offset parametrization in one placeHi @parras, @pfrank, @phaim,
in the `CorrelatedFieldMaker` as it stands at the moment, the offset from zero is parametrized in two separate places.
I propose to unify the offset parametrization into `CorrelatedFieldMaker.make` via the ...Hi @parras, @pfrank, @phaim,
in the `CorrelatedFieldMaker` as it stands at the moment, the offset from zero is parametrized in two separate places.
I propose to unify the offset parametrization into `CorrelatedFieldMaker.make` via the parameters `offset_mean`, `offset_std_mean`, `offset_std_std`.
While at it, modified the `getting_started_3` demo (where the CF model is introduced first) to pass the parameters by name and with comments, giving the reader a chance to understand what is happening and providing a nice template for copying.
Also, I renamed a few function parameters in `CorrelatedFieldMaker` in hope to make them more descriptive, but you might disagree with my judgement there.
As the creators of the model, what do you think about these changes?
Cheers,
Lukashttps://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/414Mightier operators2020-03-08T10:52:01ZReimar H LeikeMightier operatorsadd more methods to operator such that it works more like Linearizationadd more methods to operator such that it works more like LinearizationPhilipp Arrasparras@mpa-garching.mpg.dePhilipp Arrasparras@mpa-garching.mpg.dehttps://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/413Fixup gig energy2020-03-06T14:24:32ZPhilipp Arrasparras@mpa-garching.mpg.deFixup gig energyhttps://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/410Simplifications2020-03-06T10:52:33ZPhilipp Arrasparras@mpa-garching.mpg.deSimplifications@reimar, @akostic I have made some simplifications for your energy. All derivatives can be computed automatically by Linearizations.@reimar, @akostic I have made some simplifications for your energy. All derivatives can be computed automatically by Linearizations.https://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/408Fix FieldZeroPadder2020-02-19T16:45:19ZPhilipp FrankFix FieldZeroPadderhttps://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/407No DiagonalOperator if ScalingOperator is fine2020-03-09T10:44:27ZGordian EdenhoferNo DiagonalOperator if ScalingOperator is fineUse ScalingOperators wherever possible instead of falling back to DiagonalOperators.Use ScalingOperators wherever possible instead of falling back to DiagonalOperators.https://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/406README: add build instructions for docs2020-01-31T11:02:52ZLukas PlatzREADME: add build instructions for docsNo functional changesNo functional changeshttps://gitlab.mpcdf.mpg.de/ift/nifty/-/merge_requests/405fix NIFTy 5 ASCL citation2020-01-31T11:03:38ZLukas Platzfix NIFTy 5 ASCL citationProbably got mangled in the 5 -> 6 rename.
Citation fixup, no functional changes.Probably got mangled in the 5 -> 6 rename.
Citation fixup, no functional changes.