Details
-
Type:
Bug
-
Status: Done
-
Priority:
Major
-
Resolution: Done
-
Fix Version/s: None
-
Component/s: meas_modelfit
-
Labels:None
-
Templates:customfield_11800 22777
-
Story Points:0.25
-
Epic Link:
-
Sprint:Science Pipelines DM-W16-6
-
Team:Data Release Production
Description
I recently upgraded my Anaconda to version 2.5 on Mac OS X El Capitan. Rebuilding lsst_apps triggers a new test failure in meas_modelfit:
F.....
|
======================================================================
|
FAIL: testDerivatives (__main__.MixtureTestCase)
|
----------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Traceback (most recent call last):
|
File "tests/testMixture.py", line 172, in testDerivatives
|
doTest(g, x)
|
File "tests/testMixture.py", line 168, in doTest
|
self.assertClose(analyticGradient, numericGradient, rtol=1E-6)
|
File "/Users/timj/work/lsstsw/stack/DarwinX86/utils/2016_01.0+0b596edbb3/python/lsst/utils/tests.py", line 368, in assertClose
|
testCase.assertFalse(failed, msg="\n".join(msg))
|
AssertionError: 1/3 elements differ with rtol=1e-06, atol=2.22044604925e-16
|
-7.41146749152e-07 != -7.41145697331e-07 (diff=1.05182109542e-12/7.41146749152e-07=1.41918060981e-06)
|
Switching to the previous anaconda (2.4 I think) the numbers above are:
-7.41146749152e-07 != -7.41146239432e-07 (diff=5.0971982368e-13/7.41146749152e-07=6.87744801233e-07)
|
The following patch fixes it:
diff --git a/tests/testMixture.py b/tests/testMixture.py
|
index a070748..804495e 100755
|
--- a/tests/testMixture.py
|
+++ b/tests/testMixture.py
|
@@ -165,7 +165,7 @@ class MixtureTestCase(lsst.utils.tests.TestCase):
|
analyticGradient = numpy.zeros(n, dtype=float)
|
analyticHessian = numpy.zeros((n,n), dtype=float)
|
mixture.evaluateDerivatives(point, analyticGradient, analyticHessian)
|
- self.assertClose(analyticGradient, numericGradient, rtol=1E-6)
|
+ self.assertClose(analyticGradient, numericGradient, rtol=1.5E-6)
|
self.assertClose(analyticHessian, numericHessian, rtol=1E-6)
|
|
for x in numpy.random.randn(10, g.getDimension()): |
but I have no idea how reasonable that is. It is obviously disconcerting that updating the numerical library can change our tests again.
