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

Cycles met ids #756

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Nov 11, 2023
Merged

Cycles met ids #756

merged 3 commits into from
Nov 11, 2023

Conversation

hgscott
Copy link
Contributor

@hgscott hgscott commented Nov 1, 2023

Copy link
Member

@Midnighter Midnighter left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thank you for the changes! I'm curious to see all the problems this test will have once it is actually run on all the models where it was skipped before.

Please just make the changes for catching exceptions, the rest looks good!

src/memote/suite/tests/test_consistency.py Show resolved Hide resolved
src/memote/suite/tests/test_consistency.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@Midnighter
Copy link
Member

The tests fail because I need to make a fix to update the depinfo dependency... Not for you to worry about.

@hgscott
Copy link
Contributor Author

hgscott commented Nov 3, 2023

Thank you for the changes! I'm curious to see all the problems this test will have once it is actually run on all the models where it was skipped before.

Please just make the changes for catching exceptions, the rest looks good!

One thing to note that I found, because the detect_energy_generating_cycles functions returns all reactions where the flux is greater than 0.0, the list can be frighteningly long, but the vast majority of the reactions have a very low flux. So increasing the lower limit from 0.0 to something like 0.0001 decreases the number of reactions found by a lot (and probably gives a more helpful image of what is actually problematic).

I just don't want people to generate the reports and freak out that all their models are broken!

@Midnighter
Copy link
Member

That's a good point. I suppose the flux should at least be greater than the tolerance of the solver.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 11, 2023

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (5150a3a) 74.85% compared to head (18fbffe) 74.85%.

❗ Current head 18fbffe differs from pull request most recent head 3e505ca. Consider uploading reports for the commit 3e505ca to get more accurate results

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop     #756   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    74.85%   74.85%           
========================================
  Files           50       50           
  Lines         2955     2955           
  Branches       669      669           
========================================
  Hits          2212     2212           
  Misses         649      649           
  Partials        94       94           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@Midnighter Midnighter merged commit 12338a6 into opencobra:develop Nov 11, 2023
7 checks passed
@Midnighter
Copy link
Member

One thing to note that I found, because the detect_energy_generating_cycles functions returns all reactions where the flux is greater than 0.0, the list can be frighteningly long, but the vast majority of the reactions have a very low flux. So increasing the lower limit from 0.0 to something like 0.0001 decreases the number of reactions found by a lot (and probably gives a more helpful image of what is actually problematic).

Now I merged your work without taking this into account. Would you be up for creating another PR to address this?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Generalize Metabolite IDs in test_detect_energy_generating_cycles
2 participants