-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3
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
Bug: Synonym Sync: Duplicate rows #720
Conversation
- Bug fix: Fixed case in which sources can have multiple synonyms which only vary by capitalization, causing duplicate rows to appear in the results. We don't consider source capitalization as authoritative, so these variations are only useful for analysis and should not show up as multiple rows to be processed. Thus, we now aggregate capitalization variations into the single column synonym_case_diff_source.
- Minor codestyle update: Removed accidentally added \ on a line from last commit.
- Bug fix: Address issues related to mondo capitalization variation. - Update: Ensure the following columns are now in the output and are together: synonym_case_mondo, synonym_case_diff_mondo, synonym_case_mondo_is_many, synonym_case_source, synonym_case_diff_source, synonym_case_source_is_many. Note that previously, we had removed synonym_case_mondo & synonym_case_source, opting instead for the 'diff' columns, because it was previously only valuable to show the original capitalizations if there was a difference between the two. But now that we can have multiple variations in capitalization on the same syonym, it is useful to see the original case by itself, as wel as all the variations. - Update: For synonym_case_source_is_many, ensure that all variations show up in synonym_case_source and synonym_case_diff_source columns. Note that when there are multiple capitalization variations at the source, we only need 1 row. - Update: For all synonym_case_mondo_is_many, ensure that all variations show up in the synonym_case_diff_mondo column. But leave synonym_case_mondo as it is. We need to preserve the original case for that row, since unlike the source, we will retain multiple rows in the case that Mondo has multiple capitalization variations for a single synonym.
0bb9418
to
382b83d
Compare
- Delete: Some temporary, analytical code.
- Bug fix: Sometimes the multi-value source synonym field would be erroneously set as 'synonym'.
- Bug fix on last bug fix: Fixed a KeyError that occurs in the -added template.
- Update: minor: remove redundant line break
Bug fix: Synonym Sync: Recapitalization of acronyms - Fixed bug where this operation was being done for -updated and -confirmed, but it should only be done for -added. - Bug fix: I don't think we should have ever had this in the first place. I don't see that it actually fixes anything; only should cause bugs.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I can see in the gSheet where the rows are now collapsed for the IDs mentioned in this comment so approving the PR.
However, this review did find issues with how icd11.foundation synonyms are processed and will be sorted out in a separate PR so "-added" synonyms are not yet ready to be included in Mondo.
Resolves #684
Overview
Fixed case in which sources can have multiple synonyms which only vary by capitalization, causing duplicate rows to appear in the results.
We don't consider source capitalization as authoritative, so these variations are only useful for analysis and should not show up as multiple rows to be processed. Thus, we now aggregate capitalization variations into the single column
synonym_case_diff_source
.Pre-merge checklist
Documentation
Was the documentation added/updated under
docs/
?QC
Was the full pipeline run before submitting this PR using
sh run.sh make build-mondo-ingest
on this branch (afterdocker pull obolibrary/odkfull:dev
), and no errors occurred?Builds:
New Packages
Were any new Python packages added?
Were any other non-Python packages added?
PR Review and Conversations Resolved
Has the PR been sufficiently reviewed by at least 1 team member of the Mondo Technical team and all threads resolved?
Results: Google Sheet