Cover more cases of log1mexp stabilization

[lciti]

This PR fixes #1476 by reimplementing the rewrite log1pmexp_to_log1mexp using is_neg so it works with neg() as well as mul(-1.0, ...), which is the canonicalised form. It adds a test for #1476 (which now passes) as well as other tests for expressions that should simplify to log1mexp (I realised that expressions like log(-exp(x) + 1) would not work). It then implements the missing rewrite log(-expm1(x)) -> log1mexp(x) to make these additional tests pass.

Description

Related Issue

• Closes The rewrite log1pmexp_to_log1mexp is not applied #1476

Checklist

• Checked that the pre-commit linting/style checks pass
• Included tests that prove the fix is effective or that the new feature works
• Added necessary documentation (docstrings and/or example notebooks)
• If you are a pro: each commit corresponds to a relevant logical change

Type of change

• New feature / enhancement
• Bug fix
• Documentation
• Maintenance
• Other (please specify):

---

📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://pytensor--1483.org.readthedocs.build/en/1483/

[ricardoV94]

Looks good, just a question about readability at the cost of performance. We can merge as is if you disagree

[lciti]

I am not sure if you noticed, there is an opportunity to implement log1pexp_to_softplus directly within log1pmexp_to_log1mexp (which could be called log1p_pm_exp_to_log1pexp_log1mexp or sth like that) and get rid of a separate log1pexp_to_softplus function. The only disadvantage would be the inability to include/exclude just one of the two rewrites. Please let me know what you prefer.

[ricardoV94]

Yeah I think we can merge them, they're similar in nature

[lciti]

I think it's ready to go.

[ricardoV94]

Great, running tests

[lciti]

Ops, I think found a mistake. I'll commit asap.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 95.45455% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 82.01%. Comparing base (6aeed97) to head (9f9bc8b).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
pytensor/tensor/rewriting/math.py	95.45%	0 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

❌ Your patch status has failed because the patch coverage (95.45%) is below the target coverage (100.00%). You can increase the patch coverage or adjust the target coverage.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1483      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   82.00%   82.01%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         214      214              
  Lines       50413    50431      +18     
  Branches     8902     8907       +5     
==========================================
+ Hits        41342    41362      +20     
+ Misses       6863     6861       -2     
  Partials     2208     2208              

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
pytensor/tensor/rewriting/math.py	89.49% <95.45%> (+0.24%)	⬆️

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[ricardoV94]

Thanks @lciti ! Let us know if you find more things to tweak

[lciti]

Many thanks to you for your support and, more in general, for developing/maintaining such an invaluable research tool!