Skip to content

Conversation

@FilippoOlivo
Copy link
Member

This PR fix some bugs with solvers and Graphs

@FilippoOlivo FilippoOlivo force-pushed the 0.2Data branch 4 times, most recently from f32d7e4 to 6f52c79 Compare February 18, 2025 10:36
@FilippoOlivo FilippoOlivo marked this pull request as ready for review February 18, 2025 10:36
@FilippoOlivo FilippoOlivo requested a review from ndem0 February 18, 2025 10:36
@FilippoOlivo FilippoOlivo self-assigned this Feb 18, 2025
@FilippoOlivo FilippoOlivo added the pr-to-review Label for PR that are ready to been reviewed label Feb 18, 2025
@FilippoOlivo FilippoOlivo force-pushed the 0.2Data branch 9 times, most recently from 6c66cf6 to f32af3c Compare February 19, 2025 12:00
pina/utils.py Outdated
"""
def wrapper(x):
x = x.extract(input_variables)
if isinstance(x, LabelTensor):
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

why this? This method should not check the instance since it is applied only when use_lt is true in the solver. Please remove it.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If we use graphs x is a Batch object. It is necessary if I want to use graphs and LabelTensors together

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I still don't see the point. In the solver do you set use_lt to true?

@dario-coscia dario-coscia added pr-to-fix Label for PR that needs modification and removed pr-to-review Label for PR that are ready to been reviewed labels Feb 19, 2025
pina/utils.py Outdated
"""
def wrapper(x):
x = x.extract(input_variables)
if isinstance(x, LabelTensor):
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I still don't see the point. In the solver do you set use_lt to true?

@dario-coscia
Copy link
Collaborator

To me ok! Maybe @ndem0 let's first merge #457 and then this one because I think less conflicts will be created by doing this

@FilippoOlivo FilippoOlivo added the pr-to-review Label for PR that are ready to been reviewed label Feb 20, 2025
@FilippoOlivo FilippoOlivo added v0.2 and removed pr-to-fix Label for PR that needs modification labels Feb 20, 2025
@dario-coscia dario-coscia merged commit 669d870 into 0.2 Feb 20, 2025
15 of 16 checks passed
@dario-coscia dario-coscia deleted the 0.2Data branch February 26, 2025 18:25
dario-coscia pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 3, 2025
* Fix bug in Collector with Graph data
* Add comments in DataModule class and bug fix in collate
ndem0 pushed a commit to ndem0/PINA that referenced this pull request Mar 3, 2025
* Fix bug in Collector with Graph data
* Add comments in DataModule class and bug fix in collate
dario-coscia pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 12, 2025
* Fix bug in Collector with Graph data
* Add comments in DataModule class and bug fix in collate
FilippoOlivo added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 13, 2025
* Fix bug in Collector with Graph data
* Add comments in DataModule class and bug fix in collate
ndem0 pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 19, 2025
* Fix bug in Collector with Graph data
* Add comments in DataModule class and bug fix in collate
dario-coscia pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 17, 2025
* Fix bug in Collector with Graph data
* Add comments in DataModule class and bug fix in collate
GiovanniCanali pushed a commit to GiovanniCanali/PINA that referenced this pull request Dec 2, 2025
* Fix bug in Collector with Graph data
* Add comments in DataModule class and bug fix in collate
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

pr-to-review Label for PR that are ready to been reviewed

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants