Regarding CUQIpy version

[chaozg]

Hi there,

I'm one of the developers of CUQIpy, and it's great to see that you're using it in your package: nice work! 😄

I noticed that your package is based on CUQIpy 1.3.0. We recently released 1.5.0, which includes some refactorizing of the sampler module. So, I just want to check whether you're planning to upgrade CUQIpy depency to 1.5.0.

In case you do decide to update, please feel free to reach out! We're more than happy to help!

Regards,
Chao

[HatingBobbyJump]

Nice work!!!!!!!!

[flf821]

Nice work!!!!!!!!

[CBZ199671]

Hi there,

I'm one of the developers of CUQIpy, and it's great to see that you're using it in your package: nice work! 😄

I noticed that your package is based on CUQIpy 1.3.0. We recently released 1.5.0, which includes some refactorizing of the sampler module. So, I just want to check whether you're planning to upgrade CUQIpy depency to 1.5.0.

In case you do decide to update, please feel free to reach out! We're more than happy to help!

Regards, Chao

Hi Chao,

Thank you so much for reaching out! It is a great honor to have the CUQIpy team notice my project. I really appreciate your support and the suggestion to upgrade.

I am definitely planning to upgrade to CUQIpy 1.5.0 soon. I’m excited to try out the refactored sampler module and the new features. In fact, I plan to use CUQIpy for even more extensive development in the near future, so staying up-to-date with your latest releases is a priority for me.

Regarding the FEniCS integration, I previously had a discussion with your colleague Amal-ghamdi on GitHub (Issue #86) about DolfinX support. I wanted to follow up and ask if there are any plans to support DolfinX within the next year? Switching to FEniCSx would significantly enhance solving performance and make the entire pipeline of my software much faster.

On a personal note, I will be receiving my PhD this July! After graduation, I will have much more dedicated time to focus on upgrading and improving PyEIDORS, and I look forward to working more closely with the CUQIpy ecosystem.

Thank you again for developing CUQIpy—it is an incredibly useful and powerful tool!

Best regards,
BingZhou

[chaozg]

We just briefly looked your implementation at src/pyeidors/inverse/solvers/eit_pde.py, and it seems FEniCSx is not a problem. PDEModel belongs to CUQIpy (not CUQIpy-FEniCS), so it does not impose any restrictions on how you solve the PDE: you can solve it with FEniCS, FEniCSx or any other framework, as long as you provide the three routines of assemble, solve and observe.

Regarding the FEniCS integration, I previously had a discussion with your colleague Amal-ghamdi on GitHub (Issue #86) about DolfinX support. I wanted to follow up and ask if there are any plans to support DolfinX within the next year? Switching to FEniCSx would significantly enhance solving performance and make the entire pipeline of my software much faster.