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

Unpin scipy #9655

Open
larsevj opened this issue Jan 6, 2025 · 2 comments
Open

Unpin scipy #9655

larsevj opened this issue Jan 6, 2025 · 2 comments
Labels
needs-discussion Issues requiring further discussions

Comments

@larsevj
Copy link
Contributor

larsevj commented Jan 6, 2025

With scipy version 1.15.0 the following test fails: https://github.com/equinor/ert/actions/runs/12628338741/job/35184324189

Seems to be a difference in output from the fcluster method https://docs.scipy.org/doc/scipy/reference/generated/scipy.cluster.hierarchy.fcluster.html

Running the following script with scipy 1.14.1 produces: [2, 1, 1], whereas with scipy 1.15.0 you get [3,1,2] .

import numpy as np
from scipy.cluster.hierarchy import fcluster, linkage

C = np.array([[1.0, 0.2, -0.2], [0.2, 1.0, 0.3], [-0.2, 0.3, 1.0]])
Z = linkage(C, "average", "euclidean")
print(fcluster(Z, 0, criterion="maxclust", depth=2))
@sondreso sondreso moved this to Todo in SCOUT Jan 9, 2025
@xjules
Copy link
Contributor

xjules commented Jan 20, 2025

Relates to #9672

@xjules xjules added the needs-discussion Issues requiring further discussions label Jan 20, 2025
@xjules
Copy link
Contributor

xjules commented Jan 20, 2025

Can we do a test how stable the clusterings are when using new scipy compared to the old one?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
needs-discussion Issues requiring further discussions
Projects
Status: Todo
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants