Fix Inverse for LUFactorized #297
Merged
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
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@ ## master #297 +/- ## ========================================== + Coverage 89.01% 89.33% +0.31% ========================================== Files 71 71 Lines 3578 3610 +32 ========================================== + Hits 3185 3225 +40 + Misses 393 385 -8
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
This fixes the result of `a.factorize_into()?.inv()?` when `a` is column-major.
The correct interpretation of the fields of LUFactorized is very complicated when the input to the factorization was row-major.
jturner314 force-pushed the fix-factorize_into_inv branch from 8d7f43a to 6766c31 Compare 
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 Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This is a hack to fix
a.factorize_into()?.inv()?whenais column-major. The reason why this corrects the result is complicated and is related to the fact that theafield inLUFactorizedrepresents the LU factors ofA^Tin a very confusing way when the inputAto the factorization was row-major. Thesolvemodules need an overhaul to properly handle layouts in a clear way.