Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[Java track] Tests for exercise rational-numbers are flaky #2823

Open
ndlarsen opened this issue Jul 16, 2024 · 1 comment
Open

[Java track] Tests for exercise rational-numbers are flaky #2823

ndlarsen opened this issue Jul 16, 2024 · 1 comment

Comments

@ndlarsen
Copy link

Track: Java
Exercise rational-numbers
Problem: The one or more tests for the exercise are flaky/non-deterministic

The test case testRaiseARealNumberToAPositiveRationalNumber, fails when I run it locally but passes when submitted to the exercism build servers.

vscode ➜ /workspaces/java $ gradle rational-numbers:test

> Task :rational-numbers:test FAILED

RationalTest > testReduceARationalNumberWithANegativeDenominatorToLowestTerms() PASSED

RationalTest > testSubtractTwoNegativeRationalNumbers() PASSED

RationalTest > testRaiseANegativeRationalNumberToAPositiveIntegerPower() PASSED

RationalTest > testReducePlacesTheMinusSignOnTheNumerator() PASSED

RationalTest > testMultiplyARationalNumberByZero() PASSED

RationalTest > testAbsoluteValueOfAPositiveRationalNumberWithNegativeNumeratorAndDenominator() PASSED

RationalTest > testAbsoluteValueOfANegativeRationalNumber() PASSED

RationalTest > testAddARationalNumberToItsAdditiveInverse() PASSED

RationalTest > testRaiseZeroToAnIntegerPower() PASSED

RationalTest > testRaiseANegativeRationalNumberToAnEvenNegativeIntegerPower() PASSED

RationalTest > testReduceOneToLowestTerms() PASSED

RationalTest > testMultiplyARationalNumberByItsReciprocal() PASSED

RationalTest > testDivideAPositiveRationalNumberByANegativeRationalNumber() PASSED

RationalTest > testRaiseAPositiveRationalNumberToANegativeIntegerPower() PASSED

RationalTest > testReduceANegativeRationalNumberToLowestTerms() PASSED

RationalTest > testRaiseOneToAnIntegerPower() PASSED

RationalTest > testRaiseANegativeRationalNumberToAnOddNegativeIntegerPower() PASSED

RationalTest > testAddTwoPositiveRationalNumbers() PASSED

RationalTest > testDivideTwoPositiveRationalNumbers() PASSED

RationalTest > testAddAPositiveRationalNumberAndANegativeRationalNumber() PASSED

RationalTest > testRaiseARealNumberToAPositiveRationalNumber() FAILED
    java.lang.AssertionError: 
    Expecting actual:
      16.0
    to be close to:
      15.999999999999998
    by less than 1.0E-15 but difference was 2.0E-15.
    (a difference of exactly 1.0E-15 being considered valid)
        at RationalTest.assertDoublesEqual(RationalTest.java:13)
        at RationalTest.testRaiseARealNumberToAPositiveRationalNumber(RationalTest.java:246)

RationalTest > testDivideARationalNumberByOne() PASSED

RationalTest > testSubtractARationalNumberFromItself() PASSED

RationalTest > testMultiplyTwoPositiveRationalNumbers() PASSED

RationalTest > testAbsoluteValueOfZero() PASSED

RationalTest > testRaiseARealNumberToANegativeRationalNumber() PASSED

RationalTest > testReduceAPositiveRationalNumberToLowestTerms() PASSED

RationalTest > testMultiplyANegativeRationalNumberByAPositiveRationalNumber() PASSED

RationalTest > testSubtractTwoPositiveRationalNumbers() PASSED

RationalTest > testAbsoluteValueOfARationalNumberIsReducedToLowestTerms() PASSED

RationalTest > testMultiplyARationalNumberByOne() PASSED

RationalTest > testAbsoluteValueOfANegativeRationalNumberWithNegativeDenominator() PASSED

RationalTest > testAddTwoNegativeRationalNumbers() PASSED

RationalTest > testDivideTwoNegativeRationalNumbers() PASSED

RationalTest > testRaiseAPositiveRationalNumberToAPositiveIntegerPower() PASSED

RationalTest > testAbsoluteValueOfAPositiveRationalNumber() PASSED

RationalTest > testMultiplyTwoNegativeRationalNumbers() PASSED

RationalTest > testRaiseAPositiveRationalNumberToThePowerOfZero() PASSED

RationalTest > testReduceAnIntegerToLowestTerms() PASSED

RationalTest > testSubtractAPositiveRationalNumberAndANegativeRationalNumber() PASSED

RationalTest > testReduceZeroToLowestTerms() PASSED

41 tests completed, 1 failed

FAILURE: Build failed with an exception.

* What went wrong:
Execution failed for task ':rational-numbers:test'.
> There were failing tests. See the report at: file:///workspaces/java/rational-numbers/build/reports/tests/test/index.html

* Try:
> Run with --scan to get full insights.

Deprecated Gradle features were used in this build, making it incompatible with Gradle 9.0.

You can use '--warning-mode all' to show the individual deprecation warnings and determine if they come from your own scripts or plugins.

For more on this, please refer to https://docs.gradle.org/8.9/userguide/command_line_interface.html#sec:command_line_warnings in the Gradle documentation.

BUILD FAILED in 1s
3 actionable tasks: 2 executed, 1 up-to-date

The implementation is the same as pretty much everyone else have submitted

    double exp(double exponent) {
        return Math.pow(Math.pow(exponent, this.numerator), 1.0 / this.denominator);
    }

I have been banging my head against the table for quite at while due to this and needless to say, that is no fun. I do not have any solution for this but I suggest that the tests are rewritten to eliminate the current inherent unreliability.
Given the current amount of submissions for the exercise on the track I would be quite surprised if no one but me has encountered the issue.

To be fair, a member already pointed this out while solving the exercise at https://exercism.org/tracks/java/exercises/rational-numbers/solutions/nunoguedelha

        /* exponent^(a/b) = (exponent^a)^(1/b)
           If we compute ^(1/b) using the Math.pow function, we cannot a priori fully control the accuracy.
           Typically, we might not reach the accuracy of 1e-15 as the exercise tests require. For instance:
           Math.pow(8.0, 1.0/3) returns the exact result 2.0, such that if we compute 8^(4/3) as
           Math.pow(Math.pow(8.0, 1.0/3), 4) we get the exact result 16.0, but if we compute it as
           Math.pow(Math.pow(8.0, 4), 1.0/3) we get 15.999999999999998 which has an accuracy of 2e-15 > 1e-15,
           and this causes the test to fail.
           But in general, Math.pow(Math.pow(x, 4), 1.0/3) should provide a better accuracy since only the
           last operation generates an approximation error. Instead, doing it the other way around amplifies
           the error of the first operation.
           The example Math.pow(Math.pow(8, 1.0/3), 4) is a lucky case, but the simple case Math.pow(4096, 1.0/3)
           illustrates well the problem.
           Computing ^(1/b) with the Heron's method allows us to better control the accuracy and reach the desired
           1e-15.
         */
@RahulChatterjee03
Copy link

Hi,
I came across your project [Java track] Tests for exercise rational-numbers are flaky and am really impressed with the work you’re doing. I’d love to contribute and help in any way I can.

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants