Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 28 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.Sign up
Automated Pattern Oriented Modeling #269
There are several ways to build a tool to created an automated fitting procedure.
Requirements for user:
On the SpaDES side, we need either one of two mechanisms:
Likely, it will use the
Advantages of module version - it can be done by a non-Power-R-user, i.e., they don't have to know the scripting part of setting up the optimization. This would allow the optimization to be done internally within a
Advantages of function version - it can only be done by a Power R user because of the necessity of scripting and data munging/wrangling to get things in place.
Likely, it will be both, i.e., the module will wrap the function.
Nope. I gave up on using it, handling a custom objective function is not what I think this function should be made for. Using POM() for a problem that require a custom objective function, i.e. something that is not a SpaDES module, reduce POM() as a wrapper and would somewhat complicate things unnecessarily for the end-user. But maybe you have another opinion on this ?
So what is your solution for your specific problem? Can you outline it
In my case, I only needed the spread function to perform the simulations not a whole SpaDES module. My solution was to 1) create a SpaDES module to do the optimization (not the simulation), 2) design the module parameters to be used inside the objective function, and 3) set data requirements as inputs for the module.
If I had to use POM() to do this, I would still have to supply the objective function, the parameters of DEoptim and the data. Thus, I don't see how I would gain something by using it.
Btw, I don't quite understand what your saying by "So, rather than a user needing to know 4 separate things, they only need one."