-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 54
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
Implement infectivity radius on Stiefel #722
Conversation
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #722 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 99.58% 99.58%
=======================================
Files 114 114
Lines 11229 11230 +1
=======================================
+ Hits 11182 11183 +1
Misses 47 47 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
That was quick! The failure is caused by a new ambiguity:
|
Oh we should maybe check ambiguities on the infectivity radius. – So how do we reduce this? Or do we increase the bound? |
It's real, you can try calling |
Then the special point tests fail. But if that is ok, we can do that (that is remove the point ones). |
You can limit the type of |
or leave them out, we would specialise to arrays or such, and that might not be to useful (we otherwise do not do that I think). |
I think the variant with |
I omitted the p variants for now, but sure in the long run we should make the infectivity radius a bit less prone to ambiguities. |
Co-authored-by: Mateusz Baran <mateuszbaran89@gmail.com>
cf. Zimmermann & Stoye https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.02268v1 .