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

refactor: Cleanup and logging improvements in fitting algorithms #4060

Conversation

benjaminhuth
Copy link
Member

@benjaminhuth benjaminhuth commented Jan 29, 2025

self explaining

--- END COMMIT MESSAGE ---

Any further description goes here, @-mentions are ok here!

  • Use a conventional commits prefix: quick summary
    • We mostly use feat, fix, refactor, docs, chore and build types.
  • A milestone will be assigned by one of the maintainers

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Logging Improvements

    • Enhanced logging verbosity in track fitting algorithm
    • Added more detailed log entries for track processing and parameter tracking
  • Refactoring

    • Renamed algorithm from "TrackFittingAlgorithm" to "RefittingAlgorithm"
    • Minor adjustments to track indexing and logging statements

@benjaminhuth benjaminhuth added this to the next milestone Jan 29, 2025
@benjaminhuth benjaminhuth requested a review from andiwand January 29, 2025 13:28
Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Jan 29, 2025

Walkthrough

Hmm, changes in track fitting algorithms, we have. Renaming of "TrackFittingAlgorithm" to "RefittingAlgorithm", subtle but significant. Logging verbosity adjusted, more detailed insights we gain. Track processing logic refined, with careful increment of track indices. Minor yet precise modifications, showing the way of careful code craftsmanship, they are.

Changes

File Change Summary
.../TrackFitting/src/RefittingAlgorithm.cpp - Renamed algorithm from "TrackFittingAlgorithm" to "RefittingAlgorithm"
- Adjusted track index increment logic
.../TrackFitting/src/TrackFittingAlgorithm.cpp - Logging verbosity changed from ACTS_DEBUG to ACTS_VERBOSE
- Added new verbose log entries for track parameters and measurements

Possibly related PRs

Suggested labels

Component - Examples, Track Fitting, automerge

Poem

Tracks dancing through code's embrace,
Algorithms shift with gentle grace
Verbose logs whisper their tale
Refitting's path, without travail
Wisdom in each line we trace 🚀

✨ Finishing Touches
  • 📝 Generate Docstrings (Beta)

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR. (Beta)
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (2)
Examples/Algorithms/TrackFitting/src/TrackFittingAlgorithm.cpp (1)

153-153: Debug to verbose level for failed fits, changed it is.

When fitted parameters are absent, less noisy logging you chose. Good this is, as failed fits in production, less attention they need.

Yet, consider adding more context about the failure reason, you should.

-        ACTS_VERBOSE("No fitted parameters for track " << itrack);
+        ACTS_VERBOSE("No fitted parameters for track " << itrack 
+                     << ". Possible causes: insufficient measurements or failed fit");
Examples/Algorithms/TrackFitting/src/RefittingAlgorithm.cpp (1)

Line range hint 1-145: Documentation improvements suggest, I must.

Though well-structured the code is, benefit from additional documentation it would. For future Padawans, document these aspects you should:

  • Purpose of refitting versus regular fitting
  • Expected input track format
  • Output track modifications
📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between e61fa2d and 8d6c93b.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)
  • Examples/Algorithms/TrackFitting/src/RefittingAlgorithm.cpp (2 hunks)
  • Examples/Algorithms/TrackFitting/src/TrackFittingAlgorithm.cpp (3 hunks)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (1)
  • GitHub Check: merge-sentinel
🔇 Additional comments (5)
Examples/Algorithms/TrackFitting/src/TrackFittingAlgorithm.cpp (3)

122-126: Improved logging of initial parameters, I see.

Split the logging of initial state into three distinct parts, you have. Clearer visibility into the track's starting conditions, this provides. Wisdom in separating position, direction, and momentum logging, there is.


140-140: Changed debug to verbose level, you have.

For track-specific fitting operations, more granular logging level, you now use. Appropriate this change is, as detailed tracking of individual fits, only in verbose mode should be.


150-151: Track measurement comparison, added you have.

Hmm, wise addition this is. Compare the number of measurements between proto track and fitted track, it does. Help in debugging measurement losses during fitting, it will.

Examples/Algorithms/TrackFitting/src/RefittingAlgorithm.cpp (2)

38-39: Wise change in the name of the algorithm, I sense.

More precise naming convention this brings, hmm. Clearer purpose it shows, refitting from fitting it distinguishes.


130-130: Moved the track increment, wisdom in this change there is.

After full processing of track, increment now occurs. More accurate tracking of processed items, this ensures. For debugging and logging, crucial this change becomes.

Verify the track counting accuracy with this script:

✅ Verification successful

Hmm, wise move this is. Track increment now follows the way of the Force.

In codebase, pattern clear it becomes - track counting after processing, the proper path it is. Alignment with other files, harmony brings. No further verification needed, for wisdom in this change, there is.

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Search for other track index usages to ensure consistency
rg -A 3 "itrack" --type cpp

Length of output: 41555

@github-actions github-actions bot added Component - Examples Affects the Examples module Track Fitting labels Jan 29, 2025
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jan 29, 2025

📊: Physics performance monitoring for 69a3dff

Full contents

physmon summary

@kodiakhq kodiakhq bot merged commit 5b9ab76 into acts-project:main Jan 29, 2025
42 checks passed
paulgessinger pushed a commit to paulgessinger/acts that referenced this pull request Jan 30, 2025
@paulgessinger paulgessinger modified the milestones: next, v39.0.0 Feb 5, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Component - Examples Affects the Examples module Track Fitting
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants