Output results of classic grid search

[Jammy2211]

The classic grid search runs fine, but we need to output the results for quick visual inspections.

For a (y,x) grid search, can we make an model.results file that looks something like:

centre_0, centre_1, likelihood
-1.0 1.0 10.0
-0.5 1.0 15.0
-0.0 1.0 22.0

etc.

[Jammy2211]

In fact, we need this for the optimizer grid search too, e.g. for the most probably model of every optimizer search.

[rhayes777]

Both implemented. A file called "results" will now appear in the phase directory.

[Jammy2211]

The 'results' file for the classic grid search does not output anything but the parameter names.

my NLO grid searches havent finished yet, but it would be good if their results file updated between every NLO run.

[rhayes777]

Oh that’s odd. Do NLO results contain fit?

…

On 12 Feb 2019, at 10:00, James Nightingale ***@***.***> wrote: The 'results' file for the classic grid search does not output anything but the parameter names. my NLO grid searches havent finished yet, but it would be good if their results file updated between every NLO run. — You are receiving this because you modified the open/close state. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#10 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AGETMiwI41FQd5ydQgYA9mxWtxRYmCuwks5vMpDPgaJpZM4aUNca>.

[Jammy2211]

They dont contain anything called 'fit' i dont think?

[Jammy2211]

The NLO grid search was a bit more positive, giving a results file, but the centres (I guess because they were a tuple) were not both output, and neither were the scale radii / kappa_s:

lens_galaxies_subhalo_scale_radius, lens_galaxies_subhalo_centre_0, lens_galaxies_subhalo_centre_1, lens_galaxies_subhalo_kappa_s
0.00, -2.00, 25889.32
0.00, -1.33, 25888.13
0.00, -0.67, 25887.45
0.00, 0.00, 25887.31
0.00, 0.67, 25886.82
0.00, 1.33, 25899.59
5.00, -2.00, 25889.40
5.00, -1.33, 25905.59
5.00, -0.67, 25889.02
5.00, 0.00, 25887.67
5.00, 0.67, 25908.23
5.00, 1.33, 25930.16
10.00, -2.00, 25895.46
10.00, -1.33, 25891.74
10.00, -0.67, 25890.29
10.00, 0.00, 25888.69
10.00, 0.67, 25911.50
10.00, 1.33, 25907.44
15.00, -2.00, 25906.09
15.00, -1.33, 25898.90
15.00, -0.67, 25889.97
15.00, 0.00, 25889.29
15.00, 0.67, 25889.20
15.00, 1.33, 25898.67
20.00, -2.00, 25909.84
20.00, -1.33, 25901.53
20.00, -0.67, 25889.63
20.00, 0.00, 25888.69
20.00, 0.67, 25902.47
20.00, 1.33, 25910.00
25.00, -2.00, 25910.13
25.00, -1.33, 25888.76
25.00, -0.67, 25888.47
25.00, 0.00, 25886.14
25.00, 0.67, 25888.53
25.00, 1.33, 25894.89

It would be good also if we could have the spacing between parameters clearer and some summary stats (e.g. the maximum increase in likelihood and model which was the 'best') at the top. If you point me to where in autotfit this is I can probably do the summary stats.

[rhayes777]

I think this is resolved?

[rhayes777]

Bump