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

Fixes for GTShapley and scorers #264

Merged
merged 31 commits into from
Feb 20, 2023
Merged

Fixes for GTShapley and scorers #264

merged 31 commits into from
Feb 20, 2023

Conversation

mdbenito
Copy link
Collaborator

@mdbenito mdbenito commented Feb 18, 2023

Warning

This PR must be merged after #265

Description

This PR revolves around fixes for Group Testing Shapley. PR #267 will add some missing tests (e.g. Scorer)

Changes

  • Introduces utils/score.py and the Scorer type to include information about range and default values when using compose_score. This is need e.g. for Group Testing, where an accurate range is necessary.
  • Adds a missing argument to GTS
  • Switches the default solver to cvxpy's SCS because scipy linprog's highs would fail to find solutions in the presence of outlier data.
  • Removes the dedicated file test_gt.py and adds more tests using group testing.
  • Closes Owen does not return proper status #263.

Checklist

  • Wrote Unit tests (if necessary)
  • Updated Documentation (if necessary)
  • Updated Changelog
  • If notebooks were added/changed, added boilerplate cells are tagged with "nbsphinx":"hidden"

@mdbenito mdbenito self-assigned this Feb 18, 2023
@mdbenito mdbenito changed the title Fixing GTS and scorers Fixes for GTShapley and scorers Feb 18, 2023
@mdbenito mdbenito added the bug Something isn't working label Feb 19, 2023
@mdbenito mdbenito marked this pull request as ready for review February 19, 2023 09:25
docs/30-data-valuation.rst Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@mdbenito
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@AnesBenmerzoug I'm afraid there is an error here that I fixed in #267 and the checks will keep failing. I would merge both in succession

Co-authored-by: Anes Benmerzoug <[email protected]>
Copy link
Collaborator

@AnesBenmerzoug AnesBenmerzoug left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Other than the one comment and one question that I left, this looks good to me and could be merged as is.

@mdbenito mdbenito merged commit 783b0a0 into develop Feb 20, 2023
@mdbenito mdbenito deleted the feature/scorer branch February 20, 2023 21:11
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Owen does not return proper status
2 participants