Skip to content

Remove literal_adjoint(::NoTimeSolution) #997

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 25, 2025

Conversation

DhairyaLGandhi
Copy link
Member

Checklist

  • Appropriate tests were added
  • Any code changes were done in a way that does not break public API
  • All documentation related to code changes were updated
  • The new code follows the
    contributor guidelines, in particular the SciML Style Guide and
    COLPRAC.
  • Any new documentation only uses public API

Additional context

Solves https://github.com/SciML/SciMLSensitivity.jl/actions/runs/14630001687/job/41063831799?pr=1168

Add any other context about the problem here.

@ChrisRackauckas
Copy link
Member

@DhairyaLGandhi
Copy link
Member Author

One of them inside vecjacobian! in BacksolveAdjoint and the other seems to be an Enzyme bug/ type inference failure. The Any inside the SteadyStateAdjoint might be related to trivial initialization, where u0 is empty.

1 similar comment
@DhairyaLGandhi
Copy link
Member Author

One of them inside vecjacobian! in BacksolveAdjoint and the other seems to be an Enzyme bug/ type inference failure. The Any inside the SteadyStateAdjoint might be related to trivial initialization, where u0 is empty.

ChrisRackauckas added a commit to SciML/DiffEqBase.jl that referenced this pull request Apr 25, 2025
SciML/SciMLSensitivity.jl#1189 highlights that the downstream tests that are failing for SciMLSensitivity.jl are actually Enzyme issues with v1.11. These are now being tracked here EnzymeAD/Enzyme.jl#2318 for the Enzyme developers to work on. But there are certain things we've been weary about, like:

* SciML/SciMLBase.jl#997
* SciML/SciMLBase.jl#998

Because of failing downstream tests. But that's counter productive: we're not improving our autodiff interfaces because we see failures, but those aren't failures of our autodiff interfaces, those are Enzyme failures.

So for now the solution seems to be to go to v1.10 in these downstream tests and increase the coverage of SciMLSensitivity, and focus on our parts. We can re-enable "1" when Enzyme is ready for it, but for now it's just noise.
ChrisRackauckas added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 25, 2025
SciML/SciMLSensitivity.jl#1189 highlights that the downstream tests that are failing for SciMLSensitivity.jl are actually Enzyme issues with v1.11. These are now being tracked here EnzymeAD/Enzyme.jl#2318 for the Enzyme developers to work on. But there are certain things we've been weary about, like:

* #997
* #998

Because of failing downstream tests. But that's counter productive: we're not improving our autodiff interfaces because we see failures, but those aren't failures of our autodiff interfaces, those are Enzyme failures.

So for now the solution seems to be to go to v1.10 in these downstream tests and increase the coverage of SciMLSensitivity, and focus on our parts. We can re-enable "1" when Enzyme is ready for it, but for now it's just noise.
@ChrisRackauckas ChrisRackauckas merged commit 8b93144 into SciML:master Apr 25, 2025
256 of 296 checks passed
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.

2 participants