[MRG] Faster and/or backend compatible ot.dist#701
Merged
Conversation
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #701 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 97.13% 97.10% -0.04%
==========================================
Files 100 100
Lines 20369 20428 +59
==========================================
+ Hits 19786 19837 +51
- Misses 583 591 +8 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
ot.distot.dist
ot.distot.dist
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Types of changes
Fixes #697 with backend implementation for a number of distances.
The current implementation of ot.dist uses the cdist foncton form sipy on non euclidean costs which makes it very slow. This PR is an attempt at making it faster by implementing the most common distances using the backend.
For the moeme,t backend computation are ot always faster
for instanec on a 1024x200 matrix X we have
n= 1024 , d= 200
Motivation and context / Related issue
How has this been tested (if it applies)
PR checklist