Remove need for _template.yaml by evagroenendijk · Pull Request #223 · NNPDF/pineko

evagroenendijk · 2025-05-23T15:26:39Z

Remove the need for _template.yaml as in issue #202

evagroenendijk · 2025-06-19T10:12:06Z

https://github.com/NNPDF/pineko/blob/f4097f29dec964e8b2c17818b502575ffa3444f0/tests/test_evolve.py#L55C1-L55C43

@scarlehoff Could I maybe just remove this test? I could make it check that the theory cards' Q0 is the same as the default one, but to me it seems a bit superfluous

scarlehoff · 2025-06-19T10:14:18Z

Sure, shuffling around the _template and the operators might change which tests are needed.

felixhekhorn

some quick things I noticed last week

Co-authored-by: Felix Hekhorn <felixhekhorn@users.noreply.github.com>

…_template

felixhekhorn · 2026-05-19T12:49:33Z

 import pytest
 from eko.interpolation import XGrid
 from eko.io.runcards import OperatorCard
+from pineko.evolve import write_operator_card


I think this is not needed?

felixhekhorn · 2026-05-19T12:50:29Z

Can we use a more specific name please? in particular something that has "operator card" or any abbreviation thereof

felixhekhorn · 2026-05-19T12:52:02Z

+    operators_card["configs"]["ev_op_max_order"] = template.CONSTANTS["configs"][
+        "ev_op_max_order"
+    ]
+    operators_card["configs"]["inversion_method"] = template.CONSTANTS["configs"][
+        "inversion_method"
+    ]
+    operators_card["configs"]["interpolation_polynomial_degree"] = template.CONSTANTS[
+        "configs"
+    ]["interpolation_polynomial_degree"]
+    operators_card["configs"]["interpolation_is_log"] = template.CONSTANTS["configs"][
+        "interpolation_is_log"
+    ]
+    operators_card["configs"]["n_integration_cores"] = template.CONSTANTS["configs"]["n_integration_cores"]


for k in ["ev_op_max_order", "inversion_method"]: # etc op_c["c"][k] = t.c["c"][k]

and similar for debug

Thanks for your comments @felixhekhorn, I'll change them!

evagroenendijk · 2026-05-20T07:37:35Z

@felixhekhorn The regression benchmark comparing convolved predictions failed, but the maximal relative difference is 0.03497747. Would you say it's close enough?

scarlehoff · 2026-05-20T07:43:29Z

The template name should be removed from here:

pineko/src/pineko/configs.py

Line 19 in 89304e2

"operator_card_template_name",

also the NEEDED_FILE (and then needs to be removed from scaffold.py)

scarlehoff

This small of a relative difference is ok I'd say.

scarlehoff · 2026-05-20T07:56:51Z

+        "ev_op_iterations": 60,
+        "evolution_method": "iterate-exact",
+        "inversion_method": "expanded",


These should be sourced from the theory card and only from there.

Is the inversion method also set in the theory card? I can't find it in the current theory cards

@felixhekhorn what about the inversion method?
I think for the evolution of the PDF we simply fix

truncated -> expanded
iterate-exact -> exact

Should we fix the same here? Or is this not relevant and we can use expanded in both cases?

scarlehoff · 2026-05-20T08:00:25Z

+        "ev_op_max_order": [10, 0],
+        "interpolation_polynomial_degree": 4,
+        "interpolation_is_log": True,
+        "n_integration_cores": 1,


And this one should come from the command line interface. Different datasets might need different number of cores.

scarlehoff

I meant to request changes 😅

felixhekhorn · 2026-05-20T08:19:24Z

@felixhekhorn The regression benchmark comparing convolved predictions failed, but the maximal relative difference is 0.03497747. Would you say it's close enough?

I'm quite worried by this

Your theory has a different evolution method than the default(iterate-exact vs truncated).The evolution method will be set to the default value iterate-exact, check if this is what you want
Warning! The number of iteration in the theory and template is different, (60 vs 1).The number of iterations will be set to default value 60, check if this is what you want

this sounds like we can no longer run actually truncated - i.e. we can no longer reproduce 4.0. If that would be true that must be changed. This might well explain the difference we observe. We want to enforce consistent settings, i.e. "if method=truncated then iterations=1", but we don't want to enforce method=exact everywhere.

scarlehoff · 2026-05-20T08:20:38Z

This has to do with the comment I left. We just want to ensure that the evolution settings are coming from the theory not from a constant setting.

evagroenendijk · 2026-05-20T08:22:49Z

@felixhekhorn The regression benchmark comparing convolved predictions failed, but the maximal relative difference is 0.03497747. Would you say it's close enough?

I'm quite worried by this

Your theory has a different evolution method than the default(iterate-exact vs truncated).The evolution method will be set to the default value iterate-exact, check if this is what you want
Warning! The number of iteration in the theory and template is different, (60 vs 1).The number of iterations will be set to default value 60, check if this is what you want

this sounds like we can no longer run actually truncated - i.e. we can no longer reproduce 4.0. If that would be true that must be changed. This might well explain the difference we observe. We want to enforce consistent settings, i.e. "if method=truncated then iterations=1", but we don't want to enforce method=exact everywhere.

You're right! I think here I ran the benchmark while using iterate-exact (which I hardcoded into template.py). But as Juan suggested I will now let the evolution method be totally determined by the theory card. Then it would also do truncated evolution

evagroenendijk added 2 commits May 23, 2025 17:18

Introduction of template.py to contain constants and xgrid

dd2cb06

Introduction of template.py to contain constants and xgrid

51eb28b

evagroenendijk self-assigned this May 23, 2025

evagroenendijk linked an issue May 23, 2025 that may be closed by this pull request

Remove operator_cards (and _template.yaml) #202

Open

felixhekhorn added the enhancement New feature or request label May 26, 2025

Removal of need of _template.yaml

756be45

evagroenendijk added 4 commits June 19, 2025 12:18

Remove test that checks q0 from theory card & _template.py

ed25c7d

Remove unnecessary stuff from template.py

b0350dc

Resolve conflicts with master

44d784a

Forgot to add template.py

22d9ac2

felixhekhorn requested changes Apr 14, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread src/pineko/template.py Outdated

Comment thread src/pineko/template.py Outdated

evagroenendijk and others added 12 commits April 14, 2026 15:23

Remove eko version from template.py

5f7394b

Co-authored-by: Felix Hekhorn <felixhekhorn@users.noreply.github.com>

changes needed for merge with main

7c973d2

change ev_op_iterations

f560b91

Co-authored-by: Felix Hekhorn <felixhekhorn@users.noreply.github.com>

Adjusted function in cli and changed last thing in evolve.py

5b931b6

Merge branch 'remove_template' of github.com:NNPDF/pineko into remove…

a2973ab

…_template

Change ValueError of evolution method

53b193b

Adjust evolve benchmark

d8332f9

Change ValueError into warning

4c9ee46

Change error into warning and remove unnecessary import

7b06030

Add missing keys to template

b714df0

fix formatting of scripts and change debug settings to false

8e23b88

Last changes to pass last test, had forgotten some keys in template.py

3664fa2

scarlehoff self-requested a review May 19, 2026 12:34

scarlehoff marked this pull request as ready for review May 19, 2026 12:35

felixhekhorn requested changes May 19, 2026

View reviewed changes

new regression data

89304e2

scarlehoff approved these changes May 20, 2026

View reviewed changes

scarlehoff requested changes May 20, 2026

View reviewed changes

Conversation

evagroenendijk commented May 23, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

evagroenendijk commented Jun 19, 2025

Uh oh!

scarlehoff commented Jun 19, 2025

Uh oh!

felixhekhorn left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

evagroenendijk commented May 20, 2026

Uh oh!

scarlehoff commented May 20, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

scarlehoff left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

scarlehoff left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

felixhekhorn commented May 20, 2026

Uh oh!

scarlehoff commented May 20, 2026

Uh oh!

evagroenendijk commented May 20, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

evagroenendijk commented May 23, 2025 •

edited

Loading

scarlehoff commented May 20, 2026 •

edited

Loading