FIX Fixes regression in CCA #19646
FIX Fixes regression in CCA #19646
Conversation
I agree it would be great to have a non-regression test that is sensitive to cond parameter of pinv2 to make sure that we do not break this again in the future. |
Actually we could probably find a way to rewrite it as a fix that we would use in the future: Backport the scipy 1.3+ version of pinv2 in Edit or maybe it's not possible to do so without computing the SVD in which case it's pointless... |
Indeed we need a relative cutoff (which I believe |
I updated this PR with a non-regression test and moving the whats new to 0.24.2 |
LGTM! Thanks very much for the non-regression test. |
dbed806
into
scikit-learn:main
LGTM. Thanks @thomasjpfan |
Hi all, do you mind having a look at scipy/scipy#13831 and let me know if I'm missing anything else for your needs ? This will first provide atol and rtol possibilities and then long overdue pinv2 deprecation cycle will start. Since I've caused so much annoyance which I apologize once again, I guess you should be the first premium customer of the feature |
Reference Issues/PRs
Fixes #19549
What does this implement/fix? Explain your changes.
The regression was introduced in #18746. The original implementation depended on a previous version of pinv2 that was changed in scipy/scipy#10067, this PR pulls in the old version of pinv2. For now I am not considering
_pinv2_old
a "utils.fixes" because it is not a "fix" that we would remove in the future.Any other comments?
It would be nice to have a non-regression test for this. So far I tested this on the dataset provided here: #19549 (comment)