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

Fix bug #465

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 1, 2025
Merged

Fix bug #465

merged 1 commit into from
Mar 1, 2025

Conversation

FilippoOlivo
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@FilippoOlivo FilippoOlivo self-assigned this Feb 26, 2025
@FilippoOlivo FilippoOlivo added pr-to-review Label for PR that are ready to been reviewed v0.2 implementation in v0.2 labels Feb 26, 2025
@dario-coscia
Copy link
Collaborator

why = as well?

@FilippoOlivo
Copy link
Member Author

FilippoOlivo commented Feb 26, 2025

why = as well?

Essentially, this handles the case when there is a single input point in the condition. Indeed, if we have, for example, only one point in the dataset, the loop behaves as follows:
• Train: offset == 0, then increment by 1 (offset == len_condition). In this case, we add the point.
• Test: offset == 1, we enter the if condition and decrement. However, in this case, we do not add any points.
• Validation: offset == 0 (similar to the train case).

with the new condition in test_split a datapoint is added, since the offset is reset to 0 after train_split creation

@FilippoOlivo
Copy link
Member Author

@dario-coscia If ok, I merge this small fix

@dario-coscia dario-coscia merged commit 53b5fd7 into mathLab:0.2 Mar 1, 2025
17 checks passed
@dario-coscia dario-coscia deleted the 0.2 branch March 1, 2025 11:04
@dario-coscia dario-coscia restored the 0.2 branch March 1, 2025 11:15
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
pr-to-review Label for PR that are ready to been reviewed v0.2 implementation in v0.2
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants