-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5
CI and test cases for static, mp, mp with storage opf #8
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
Conversation
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.
We should place the LICENSE file in this directory https://github.com/power-grid-lib/pglib-opf/blob/master/LICENSE
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.
Also, create a short README file describing the source of the data and acknowledgement
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.
second readme added in data folder with pglib license
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.
where did we get this data?
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 data is from solving the mpopf on cpu with 1e-8 tol. We make the assumption that the current implementation is accurate and future changes that change the optimal solution contribute an error
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.
Ive added a comment in the code to indicate as much
| return d + .2/srating*d^2 | ||
| end | ||
|
|
||
| function runtests() |
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.
Not sure if we need to roll out all the permutations. Can we use for loops to reduce redundancy and make it more concise?
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.
ive added a loop for polar/rectangular form to cut down on some of the code. Im not sure we can make it much more efficient, and selectively using certain permutations would force us to unpack some of the loops. In prior testing ive run into bugs on select permutations so i think it is valuable to go through them all
No description provided.