Add approximate solution cost threshold parameter #51
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Co-authored-by: Sebastian Castro <4603398+sea-bass@users.noreply.github.com>
sea-bass
approved these changes
Jun 25, 2023
# for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
# to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR adds a cost threshold parameter for the approximate solution.
The motivation for this is, that it gives the same threshold options for the approximate goal as for the exact goal. Thereby, the user can decide in more detail which approximate solution they want to accept.
I use it, for example, so that I can stop optimizing if a goal reaches a certain threshold (the
cost_threshold) but if I did not manage to find this, I will still accept a goal which has a higher cost value as long as it is not too high (below theapproximate_solution_cost_threshold).I also changed the code a bit to use gain the
make_is_solution_test_fn(). Before, there was a bit of code duplication which would have gotten worse with the addition of my parameter.