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

refactor!: Rewrote the ambiguity solver for clarity and added Optional Hits Selector #3805

Open
wants to merge 19 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

Ragansu
Copy link
Contributor

@Ragansu Ragansu commented Oct 31, 2024

The Score based solver needed one more feature to be more compatible with Athena, that is optional hit selector. The optional selector enables users to add optional function to the hit selection stage which was previously NOT possible.
In order to do this I had to template the existing getCleanedOutTracks.

This gave me an opportunity to rewrite the whole solver again for efficiency and clarity.

Ragansu Chakkappai.

--- END COMMIT MESSAGE ---

@CarloVarni , @Corentin-Allaire

@github-actions github-actions bot added Component - Core Affects the Core module Component - Examples Affects the Examples module Ambiguity Resolution labels Oct 31, 2024
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Oct 31, 2024

📊: Physics performance monitoring for a13c4ad

Full contents

physmon summary

Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Nov 5, 2024

Important

Review skipped

Auto reviews are limited to specific labels.

🏷️ Labels to auto review (1)
  • coderabbit

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.


Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

@CarloVarni
Copy link
Collaborator

@Ragansu do I understand that right that it is also computing and labeling hits as SharedHits?

@Ragansu
Copy link
Contributor Author

Ragansu commented Nov 6, 2024

@Ragansu do I understand that right that it is also computing and labeling hits as SharedHits?

Yes and No, There is computing of number of tracks shared with a said hit, but its not assigning to Acts::TrackStateFlag
We still need to add the Acts::TrackStateFlag::SharedHitFlag before the track reaches ambi solver,

I could rewrite the code to include this calculation into the ambi solver but I believe it should be part of the original const track object. So before ambiguity solver.

@CarloVarni CarloVarni added this to the next milestone Nov 11, 2024
@CarloVarni
Copy link
Collaborator

CarloVarni commented Nov 11, 2024

@Ragansu can you fix the docs test? (assuming it is still there ...)

Copy link

sonarcloud bot commented Nov 11, 2024

@Ragansu
Copy link
Contributor Author

Ragansu commented Nov 11, 2024

@Ragansu can you fix the docs test? (assuming it is still there ...)

You mean the one shown by sonar cube ? I probably can but it will take decent amount of time to make appropriate unit tests.
Can I do it in a later PR?

@CarloVarni CarloVarni modified the milestones: next, v38.0.0 Nov 11, 2024
@CarloVarni CarloVarni changed the title refactor: Rewrote the ambiguity solver for clarity and added Optional Hits Selector refactor!: Rewrote the ambiguity solver for clarity and added Optional Hits Selector Nov 11, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Ambiguity Resolution Component - Core Affects the Core module Component - Examples Affects the Examples module
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants