You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
It could be useful, and make the code cleaner, to have both bounds and scale be initialized with the ApproxPosterior object. Bounds is used in numerous places to maintain numerically stability and validate point selection. Scaling parameters is used throughout now, as well, so it could make sense to initialize the scaler earlier on. Also, this could allow for the user to select several common scales, like MinMax, Normal, etc, using the sklearn interface. MinMax is easy to initialize with bounds for training the scaler, but Normal and other types of scaling requires fitting on training data, which in our case, could be the initial theta.
I can get around breaking the API by allowing the user to override bounds in the ApproxPosterior run method and with sensible default choices for both scale and bounds.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
It could be useful, and make the code cleaner, to have both bounds and scale be initialized with the ApproxPosterior object. Bounds is used in numerous places to maintain numerically stability and validate point selection. Scaling parameters is used throughout now, as well, so it could make sense to initialize the scaler earlier on. Also, this could allow for the user to select several common scales, like MinMax, Normal, etc, using the sklearn interface. MinMax is easy to initialize with bounds for training the scaler, but Normal and other types of scaling requires fitting on training data, which in our case, could be the initial theta.
I can get around breaking the API by allowing the user to override bounds in the ApproxPosterior run method and with sensible default choices for both scale and bounds.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: