-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 106
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
Many tests very sensitive to the RNG #317
Comments
I think IterativeSolvers.jl/test/gmres.jl Line 30 in cbb92e7
should be @test norm(F \ (A * x - b)) / norm(F \ b) ≤ reltol since termination is based on the preconditioned residual IterativeSolvers.jl/src/gmres.jl Line 18 in cbb92e7
That change seems to fix the test failure for Also, the property that the residual is non-increasing is very prone to rounding errors so this test also seems sensitive to which problem it is applied to: IterativeSolvers.jl/test/gmres.jl Lines 22 to 25 in cbb92e7
|
In general, I'm not sure Random should be used for test of iterative methods considering that the generated sequence is likely to change in future julia release. The convergence is a property very sensitive to the matrix and there is always a substantial risk it will not work for a given new random matrix. Changing the tolerance, etc are quick fixes which lessens the likelyhood of test failure but never removes it completely. |
Yea, would be good to use https://github.com/JuliaRandom/StableRNGs.jl |
In Julia 1.7 the global rng changed and that caused many test failures in this package. I adjusted test-matrices a bit in cbb92e7 to get tests running, but it is a bit worrisome that tests are so sensitive to the RNG, I would have thought the methods would be more stable in many of the examples here. Could it indicate that something is wrong in some of the implementations? (See #316 for lobpcg specifivally). Would be good if someone more familiar with the implementation could check.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: