Conversation
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop #1374 +/- ##
===========================================
- Coverage 90.21% 90.20% -0.01%
===========================================
Files 135 135
Lines 14658 14658
===========================================
- Hits 13223 13222 -1
- Misses 1435 1436 +1 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
|
Still need to use 2.3.0 for darwin (probably fine, until we start hitting any significant API/accuracy changes....). Ribosome recon is running (gpu) to see if we have any unexpected changes there. If not we can probably merge this guy. |
|
Some interesting initial results. The ribo recon using cufinufft 2.5.0 seems to have improved (6.2A, a 1-2A improvement). However, it took much longer (20 hours instead of 8-10). I'm not sure if it is because the GPU was running something else or the package itself. Running it again on an empty GPU. I'll also launch another run with the only difference being cufinufft at |
|
After more careful timing and scoring, things are not as bad as I thought initially, but they are still different... 9.5 hour vs 8 hour. Visually recons are similar, can't say one is characteristically better than other IMO. My remark above about 6A was incorrect, I had used the wrong cutoff (0.143). Using the latest code (3223d4c)... just manually installing 2.4.0 in the one case. (both on 13x, etc all else same). cufinufft 2.5.0 took 9:24:23.30 to yield an FSC (0.5cutoff) of 9.56 cufinufft 2.4.0 took 7:56:09.41 to yield an FSC (0.5cutoff) of 9.85 |
Running our latest code with
finufft==2.5.0through our CI; disregard the "Ready for Review". Still testing to do locally and some basic comparisons etc.