Need unit tests with analytic solutions

[mikeingold]

The current unit testing structure was aimed mainly at testing all possible combinations {f, G, IA} where f is the integral function name/alias, G is a Meshes.Geometry sub-type, and IA is an integration algorithm. In hindsight, the system I wrote for batching these tests was perhaps a little bit too clever for its own good. It also relies on Meshes.measure to produce correct answers for a unit-valued integrand.

As of 7-Sep-2024, we’re currently at about 77% code coverage per the Codecov report. Most of the gaps seem to be related to wrapper/convenience methods, i.e. ones that simply batch out to the core integration methods.

Ideas for a more robust test system:

• Define more interesting test geometries with analytic solutions to check against
• Evaluate whether TestItems.jl could be helpful here

Status of Unit Tests with Analytic Solutions

• Ball (2D)
• Ball (3D)
• BezierCurve
• Box (1D)
• Box (2D)
• Box (3D)
• Box (4D)
• Circle
• Disk
• Line
• ParameterizedCurve
• Plane
• Quadrangle
• Ray
• Ring
• Rope
• Segment
• Sphere (2D)
• Sphere (3D)
• Cone
• ConeSurface
• Cylinder
• CylinderSurface
• Ellipsoid
• FrustumSurface
• Hexahedron
• ParaboloidSurface
• Tetrahedron
• Torus
• Triangle

[mikeingold]

I just merged #68 beginning an effort to restructure unit tests.

[JoshuaLampert]

#73 continues this effort.

[JoshuaLampert]

#78 implements a TestItems.jl workflow.

[mikeingold]

Status Update as of v0.14.0

Code coverage is "officially" up to 100% as of the v0.14.0 release. However, this only verifies that all lines of code within this package are exercised during the tests, not that all possible combinations of integral argument types produce correct results.

Work is still ongoing to convert old-style generated @testset's to new-style (combinations.jl) @testitem's.

[mikeingold]

Status Update

As of #100 merging, the previous automatic test generation system (auto-tests.jl) has been completely removed in favor of a collection of TestItems.jl @testitems (combinations.jl).

Remaining work on this Issue:

• Some @testitems still use a unit integrand (I.e. f(p) = 1.0) and fairly simple geometry constructions with benchmark integral value provided by Meshes.measure. These should be updated with more interesting functions and geometries with known analytics solutions.

[mikeingold]

I have an idea for implementing analytical tests for Triangle and Tetrahedron, but it would require some modification/bypassing of the current test/combinations.jl infrastructure:

• Use the appropriately-dimensioned Box tests as a starting point.
• Define multiple Triangle/Tetrahedrons that collectively span the entire Box domain.
• Check the sum of these integrals against the correct solution.