Add a test case for OPTICS bug #12090 #12134
Closed
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
kno10
added a commit
to kno10/scikit-learn
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 22, 2018
kno10
added a commit
to kno10/scikit-learn
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 11, 2018
qinhanmin2014
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 14, 2018
* Add a test case for OPTICS bug (closes #12134) * ENH Fix processing order in OPTICS. See #12090 The current code may expand the wrong point, because it only considers the neighbors of the current point, not all currently unprocessed points (which may have a better reachability). Using the distance from the latest point as tiebreaker then does not work anymore, because it might not yet be computed for all unprocessed points when using an index. If we choose the first on ties, we get the same result same as R and ELKI. But the order of points in "unproc" is also unstable, so we cannot rely on the first smallest to have the smallest index. Instead of the cython quick_scan, we now use numpy masked arrays.
anuragkapale
pushed a commit
to anuragkapale/scikit-learn
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 23, 2018
* Add a test case for OPTICS bug (closes scikit-learn#12134) * ENH Fix processing order in OPTICS. See scikit-learn#12090 The current code may expand the wrong point, because it only considers the neighbors of the current point, not all currently unprocessed points (which may have a better reachability). Using the distance from the latest point as tiebreaker then does not work anymore, because it might not yet be computed for all unprocessed points when using an index. If we choose the first on ties, we get the same result same as R and ELKI. But the order of points in "unproc" is also unstable, so we cannot rely on the first smallest to have the smallest index. Instead of the cython quick_scan, we now use numpy masked arrays.
xhluca
pushed a commit
to xhluca/scikit-learn
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 28, 2019
* Add a test case for OPTICS bug (closes scikit-learn#12134) * ENH Fix processing order in OPTICS. See scikit-learn#12090 The current code may expand the wrong point, because it only considers the neighbors of the current point, not all currently unprocessed points (which may have a better reachability). Using the distance from the latest point as tiebreaker then does not work anymore, because it might not yet be computed for all unprocessed points when using an index. If we choose the first on ties, we get the same result same as R and ELKI. But the order of points in "unproc" is also unstable, so we cannot rely on the first smallest to have the smallest index. Instead of the cython quick_scan, we now use numpy masked arrays.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Reference Issues/PRs
See also #12090
What does this implement/fix? Explain your changes.
Unit test to trigger a bug in current OPTICS code.