Skip to content

Update info in leading_boundary output for CTMRG#365

Merged
leburgel merged 1 commit intomasterfrom
lb/ctmrg_info
Apr 29, 2026
Merged

Update info in leading_boundary output for CTMRG#365
leburgel merged 1 commit intomasterfrom
lb/ctmrg_info

Conversation

@leburgel
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@leburgel leburgel commented Apr 22, 2026

Addresses #354. Changes the contents of the info named tuple returned by the CTMRG leading_boundary to now include:

  • info.converged::Bool: Boolean flag indicating whether or not the leading_boundary run converged to the requested tol within the specified maxiter.
  • info.convergence_error::Real: Convergence error after the final iteration of the leading_boundary run.

In addition, I would suggest we remove the intermediate objects used in the contraction algorithm (U/S/V for asymmetric CTMRG, V/D for eigh-C4vCTMRG, Q/R for QR-C4vCTMRG from the output info. This is all extremely specific to the algorithm being used, and as far as I can tell this output is never actually used. I left in the contraction_metrics field, since these metrics do seem useful.

The only place where this output is used is in the info returned by a single ctmrg_iteration (specifically for gauge fixing). That makes much more sense to me, since these decompositions are really intermediate objects in a single iteration. So it makes sense to keep them there. Let me know what you think about removing the decompositions from the info output of leading_boundary @pbrehmer.

@codecov
Copy link
Copy Markdown

codecov Bot commented Apr 22, 2026

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 80.00000% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
src/algorithms/ctmrg/ctmrg.jl 80.00% 1 Missing ⚠️
Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
src/algorithms/ctmrg/ctmrg.jl 90.66% <80.00%> (+0.38%) ⬆️
🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@leburgel leburgel requested a review from pbrehmer April 26, 2026 08:30
@leburgel
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

What do you think about removing the decompositions from the info output of leading_boundary @pbrehmer?

@pbrehmer
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Sorry, I somehow missed this review request. I think removing the decompositions from the info output makes a lot of sense. Especially in light of #364, there is no real reason to keep returning the decompositions. I also like the updated docstring, so this is good to go for me.

@leburgel leburgel merged commit e50c3eb into master Apr 29, 2026
60 of 63 checks passed
@leburgel leburgel deleted the lb/ctmrg_info branch April 29, 2026 08:47
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.

3 participants