Thank you for contributing to aeon

I have added the following labels to this PR based on the title: [ $\color{#FEF1BE}{\textsf{enhancement}}$ ].
I have added the following labels to this PR based on the changes made: [ $\color{#6F6E8D}{\textsf{anomaly detection}}$, $\color{#2C2F20}{\textsf{testing}}$ ]. Feel free to change these if they do not properly represent the PR.

The Checks tab will show the status of our automated tests. You can click on individual test runs in the tab or "Details" in the panel below to see more information if there is a failure.

If our pre-commit code quality check fails, any trivial fixes will automatically be pushed to your PR unless it is a draft.

Don't hesitate to ask questions on the aeon Slack channel if you have any.

PR CI actions

These checkboxes will add labels to enable/disable CI functionality for this PR. This may not take effect immediately, and a new commit may be required to run the new configuration.

• Run pre-commit checks for all files
• Run mypy typecheck tests
• Run all pytest tests and configurations
• Run all notebook example tests
• Run numba-disabled codecov tests
• Stop automatic pre-commit fixes (always disabled for drafts)
• Disable numba cache loading
• Push an empty commit to re-run CI checks

As I understand it some tests are failing because the series as well as the collection ROCKAD are named the same? Should we give unique names like ROCKAD_Series and ROCKAD_Collection? However this would not fit in the current naming schema... Or can the tests be updated?

Hi, I fixed this in a separate PR. It may be better to rename one of them either way, i.e. SubsequenceROCKAD or something

Hi, I fixed this in a separate PR. It may be better to rename one of them either way, i.e. SubsequenceROCKAD or something

Ok, should we then just rename the whole-series approach to class WholeSeriesRockad()? File name can stay the same (_rockad)?

I will leave it up to you, I have no preference. I assumed the whole series one was the original.

I will leave it up to you, I have no preference. I assumed the whole series one was the original.

I’ve thought about this again, and if the test issue has been resolved anyway, I would actually prefer keeping the original class names. This way, the class names across the different ML approaches remain consistent. In my opinion, the abstraction between BaseSeriesAnomalyDetector and BaseCollectionAnomalyDetector is already clear enough.

I am also fine with keeping the names the same. @MatthewMiddlehurst do you prefer separate names, anyway?

sorry, missed the PR, I dont mind if they have the same name either

Hi, i reworked how to thread a bit so there was a new failure here. I have fixed this a few small bits myself.

I'm not sure the PowerTransform bit is necessary and I can't seem to reproduce it with a test so have removed it for now. Maybe @pattplatt can give some help here if it is necessary. It can be turned off with a parameter in either case for the same functionality as the automatic disabling.

Just removed the docs bit for now, they both have the same name so not sure if that will cause issues when linking to each other in a "See Also" section or whatever.