-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.4k
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
Added a maintain_sparsity
argument to SparseMatrixSimilarity.
#590
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
97fada5
Added a `maintain_sparsity` argument to SparseMatrixSimilarity.
davechallis 05a34d1
Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/develop' into develop
davechallis 3203e21
Added unit test for SparseMatrixSimilarity with `maintain_sparsity` set.
davechallis fe1d443
Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/develop' into develop
davechallis File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The line above,
result.toarray().flatten()
, will still densify the output. So you'll get sometimes dense, sometimes sparse, depending whichif
branch is hit.I don't know your use case exactly, but isn't it better to do this
maintain_sparsity
check as the first thing, so that the output is always sparse (or always dense)? The API seems cleaner that way.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hmm, good point, I'll change that. I figured that a dense array was probably a better choice for queries of a single document, but probably more important to keep the API cleaner and more predictable.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Just started having a look at this, but not sure it's possible actually - I think scipy's sparse matrices have to be 2 dimensional, so I can transform an (N, 1) sparse matrix to a (1, N) one, but can't convert it to an (N,) shaped one as the dense branch of code does.
Any preferences on behaviour for this?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
No preferences -- all code up till now uses dense outputs. You're the first "sparse output" user, so the decision on how to treat single-vector inputs is yours! You know the use-case best.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Having tried a few options, I think I'm happy with the pull request as it is. It's already a fairly specialised use case, so I think it's safe to leave it as it is.