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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Non-specified initial seeds are still consistently the same #252

Closed
10 tasks done
PaulTalbot-INL opened this issue Jul 18, 2017 · 2 comments · Fixed by #598
Closed
10 tasks done

Non-specified initial seeds are still consistently the same #252

PaulTalbot-INL opened this issue Jul 18, 2017 · 2 comments · Fixed by #598
Assignees
@PaulTalbot-INL
Labels
defect priority_critical

Comments

@PaulTalbot-INL
Copy link
Collaborator

PaulTalbot-INL commented Jul 18, 2017 •
edited by alfoa
Loading

Issue Description

What did you expect to see happen?

New random data each run without initialSeed defined

What did you see instead?

Same every time

For Change Control Board: Issue Review

This review should occur before any development is performed as a response to this issue.

  • 1. Is it tagged with a type: defect or improvement?
  • 2. Is it tagged with a priority: critical, normal or minor?
  • 3. If it will impact requirements or requirements tests, is it tagged with requirements?
  • 4. If it is a defect, can it cause wrong results for users? If so an email needs to be sent to the users.
  • 5. Is a rationale provided? (Such as explaining why the improvement is needed or why current code is wrong.)

For Change Control Board: Issue Closure

This review should occur when the issue is imminently going to be closed.

  • 1. If the issue is a defect, is the defect fixed?
  • 2. If the issue is a defect, is the defect tested for in the regression test system? (If not explain why not.)
  • 3. If the issue can impact users, has an email to the users group been written (the email should specify if the defect impacts stable or master)?
  • 4. If the issue is a defect, does it impact the latest stable branch? If yes, is there any issue tagged with stable (create if needed)?
  • 5. If the issue is being closed without a merge request, has an explanation of why it is being closed been provided?
@PaulTalbot-INL PaulTalbot-INL self-assigned this Jul 18, 2017
@PaulTalbot-INL PaulTalbot-INL mentioned this issue Jul 18, 2017
Closed
8 tasks
@alfoa
Copy link
Collaborator

alfoa commented Apr 30, 2018

@PaulTalbot-INL is this still valid?

@PaulTalbot-INL
Copy link
Collaborator Author

It is true, but I don't know if it's a problem. Last I learned from chatting with the team, we expected that un-seeded runs of RAVEN would be seeded internally. We discussed the possibility of having a flag for unseeding so that behavior could be obtained by users desiring it.

@alfoa alfoa mentioned this issue May 17, 2018
Merged
8 tasks
alfoa added a commit that referenced this issue May 17, 2018
@alfoa
Dataobject rework - future RAVEN v 1.1 (#598)
688cdd1 
Closes #182
Closes #363
Closes #225
Closes #568 (obsolete with respect to the new DataObject)
Closes #56 (obsolete with respect to the new DataObject)
Closes #112
Closes #589
Closes #319
Closes #305
Closes #252
Closes #573
Closes #551
Closes #73
Closes #551 (overcome by establish_conda_env.sh script)
Closes #627
Closes #258
Closes #129
Closes #93
Closes #91
Closes #83
Closes #77
Closes #58
Closes #43
Closes #68

This PR addresses multiple Issues.
The following new features have been added:

    new Data object structure
    addition of DataSet class
    standardization of PostProcessors' outputs
    New ROMs (time-dependent)
    Possibility to handle vector input spaces (not just scalars)
    Degradation problems with printing solved
    EnsembleModel for Unstructured Input handling
    Reached 100% tests' documentation
    New Code interfaces (e.g. SCALE)
    Library update

THIS PULL REQUEST (AND THE NEW DEVEL) WILL BE THE RAVEN V 1.1 RELEASE
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@PaulTalbot-INL PaulTalbot-INL

Labels
defect priority_critical
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
2 participants
@PaulTalbot-INL @alfoa