Skip to content
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

Randomization for FractionalFactorials #510

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 5, 2025
Merged

Conversation

jduerholt
Copy link
Contributor

This PR adds an option for randomizing the order of candidates proposed by the FractionaFactorialStrategy.

@jduerholt
Copy link
Contributor Author

@Osburg
Copy link
Collaborator

Osburg commented Feb 5, 2025

Hey Johannes :)

To me it looks like it is running without an error, am I wrong?

Screenshot from 2025-02-05 14-25-15

Cheers,
Aaron

@jduerholt
Copy link
Contributor Author

@Osburg: you are right. The error stems from another one, and I solved it in a seperate one. If you are already looking at this PR, can you also just review ;)

@jduerholt
Copy link
Contributor Author

Copy link
Collaborator

@Osburg Osburg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

think it looks good :)

@Osburg
Copy link
Collaborator

Osburg commented Feb 5, 2025

@Osburg: here it is failing again; https://github.com/experimental-design/bofire/actions/runs/13155774927/job/36712478341?pr=511

Will have a look at it

@jduerholt jduerholt merged commit 1e1261e into main Feb 5, 2025
8 of 10 checks passed
@jduerholt jduerholt deleted the feature/doe_runorder branch February 5, 2025 14:05
@Osburg
Copy link
Collaborator

Osburg commented Feb 5, 2025

The notebook fails since ipopt sometimes has problems to fulfill the more complicated nonlinear constraints (like the cones) to the (fixed) tolerance level in the validation of candidates. I would suggest to set "raise_validation_error=False" for the cone examples (since the constraints are only mildly violated, i.e. above the threshold but still on the cone surface when visually inspecting the design). An alternative would be to increase the number of max iterations, but then the notebook will run longer, which is not worth it i think, the jobs are running for a very long time now already... What do you think?

@Osburg Osburg mentioned this pull request Feb 5, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants