Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
Feature validation profiles closes #94 #658
Feature validation profiles closes #94 #658
Changes from all commits
6609930
d09756d
bee32ca
f9866f7
9533c7b
a3560b5
eb39c4d
bca4092
6518b94
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
what would be if there is a Bayesian prior defined?
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'm wondering whether it's better to define the "training problem" and the "full problem" or rather the "training problem" and the "validation problem". While I see that it's handy just to call an objective function of the full problem, it seems 1. hard to "subtract" the training problem from the full problem, if at some point it will be necessary to use the validation problem itself... moreover, it might 2. be less intuitive for the user to provide a "training" and a "full" problem rather than a "training" and a "validation" problem...
2nd is just a guess, the actual argument would be 1. What do you think about this?
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.
comment: if result for full data not provided, minimize ...
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.
Would avoid mixing
unittest
andpytest
to keep things simpler, but not sure what the pypesto policy is there.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.
Haha, my policy would always be to use pytest instead of the class-syntax, which I find hard to read. Would be possible here for sure, but all would be fine for me.
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.
docstring
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.
is it somehow possible to test whether the output makes sense? i.e. the returned values are as expected when fitting on full data from the same model, vs they give point to problems when that's not the case?