Follow-up for Fixing SSIM Test Method Names

[benediktjohannes]

This fixes some other issues which were described in #8746 .

Description

This is a follow-up for #8746, thanks and credits to @ericspod! 👍

Types of changes

• Non-breaking change (fix or new feature that would not break existing functionality).
• Breaking change (fix or new feature that would cause existing functionality to change).
• New tests added to cover the changes.
• Integration tests passed locally by running ./runtests.sh -f -u --net --coverage.
• Quick tests passed locally by running ./runtests.sh --quick --unittests --disttests.
• In-line docstrings updated.
• Documentation updated, tested make html command in the docs/ folder.

[coderabbitai]

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

Three test method names in TestSSIMMetric class were renamed to comply with snake_case naming conventions: test2d_gaussian to test_2d_gaussian, test2d_uniform to test_2d_uniform, and test3d_gaussian to test_3d_gaussian. No logic, behavior, or test content was modified.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~2 minutes

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 2 | ❌ 1

❌ Failed checks (1 warning)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Docstring Coverage	⚠️ Warning	Docstring coverage is 0.00% which is insufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%.	Write docstrings for the functions missing them to satisfy the coverage threshold.

✅ Passed checks (2 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Title check	✅ Passed	Title clearly summarizes the main change: renaming SSIM test methods to follow snake_case conventions.
Description check	✅ Passed	Description includes all required template sections: link to related issue, clear explanation as follow-up work, and properly completed types of changes checklist.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing Touches

• 📝 Generate docstrings (stacked PR)
• 📝 Generate docstrings (commit on current branch)

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Post copyable unit tests in a comment

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 1

Caution

Some comments are outside the diff and can’t be posted inline due to platform limitations.

⚠️ Outside diff range comments (1)

tests/metrics/test_ssim_metric.py (1)

63-74: ⚠️ Potential issue | 🟠 Major

input_ill_input_shape and mismatch_y_pred_and_y are never executed.

Both methods lack the test_ prefix, so the test runner silently ignores them. Given this PR is specifically fixing test method names, these should be fixed here too.

🐛 Proposed fix

-    def input_ill_input_shape(self):
+    def test_input_ill_input_shape(self):
         with self.assertRaises(ValueError):
             metric = SSIMMetric(spatial_dims=3)
             metric(torch.randn(1, 1, 16, 16), torch.randn(1, 1, 16, 16))

         with self.assertRaises(ValueError):
             metric = SSIMMetric(spatial_dims=2)
             metric(torch.randn(1, 1, 16, 16, 16), torch.randn(1, 1, 16, 16, 16))

-    def mismatch_y_pred_and_y(self):
+    def test_mismatch_y_pred_and_y(self):
         with self.assertRaises(ValueError):
             compute_ssim_and_cs(y_pred=torch.randn(1, 1, 16, 8), y=torch.randn(1, 1, 16, 16), spatial_dims=2)

🤖 Prompt for AI Agents

Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

In `@tests/metrics/test_ssim_metric.py` around lines 63 - 74, Rename the two test
methods so the test runner executes them: change input_ill_input_shape to
test_input_ill_input_shape and mismatch_y_pred_and_y to
test_mismatch_y_pred_and_y; these methods reference SSIMMetric and
compute_ssim_and_cs, so update only the method names (no other logic) to ensure
the assertions raising ValueError run during test collection.

🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents

Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

Inline comments:
In `@tests/metrics/test_ssim_metric.py`:
- Line 35: The assertion uses a one-sided check (expected_value - result.item()
< 0.000001) which allows results greater than expected_value to pass; replace it
with a symmetric tolerance check by using abs(expected_value - result.item()) <
1e-6 or unittest's self.assertAlmostEqual(result.item(), expected_value,
places=6) for the assertions that reference expected_value and result.item()
(apply the same change to the other two occurrences mentioned).

---

Outside diff comments:
In `@tests/metrics/test_ssim_metric.py`:
- Around line 63-74: Rename the two test methods so the test runner executes
them: change input_ill_input_shape to test_input_ill_input_shape and
mismatch_y_pred_and_y to test_mismatch_y_pred_and_y; these methods reference
SSIMMetric and compute_ssim_and_cs, so update only the method names (no other
logic) to ensure the assertions raising ValueError run during test collection.

[coderabbitai]

⚠️ Potential issue | 🟡 Minor

One-sided tolerance check — upper-bound errors pass silently.

expected_value - result.item() < 0.000001 only fails when the result is too low; any result above expected_value trivially satisfies it. Use abs() or assertAlmostEqual.

🐛 Proposed fix (shown for line 35; apply identically to lines 48 and 61)

-        self.assertTrue(expected_value - result.item() < 0.000001)
+        self.assertAlmostEqual(result.item(), expected_value, places=5)

Also applies to: 48-48, 61-61

🤖 Prompt for AI Agents

Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

In `@tests/metrics/test_ssim_metric.py` at line 35, The assertion uses a one-sided
check (expected_value - result.item() < 0.000001) which allows results greater
than expected_value to pass; replace it with a symmetric tolerance check by
using abs(expected_value - result.item()) < 1e-6 or unittest's
self.assertAlmostEqual(result.item(), expected_value, places=6) for the
assertions that reference expected_value and result.item() (apply the same
change to the other two occurrences mentioned).