Skip to content
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

_assert_equal_properties(data_input) #41

Closed
JanNeuendorf opened this issue Jan 27, 2022 · 3 comments
Closed

_assert_equal_properties(data_input) #41

JanNeuendorf opened this issue Jan 27, 2022 · 3 comments

Comments

@JanNeuendorf
Copy link
Contributor

I noticed that the correlator__init__() method now requires the same number of deltas. (Is this true?)
Is there a reason for enforcing this?

@fjosw
Copy link
Owner

fjosw commented Jan 27, 2022

Yes, I implemented this additional check to be sure that the data is not corrupted. I believe all entries of a correlator should be defined on the same set of configurations in all practical scenarios (although that is not strictly necessary for the correct error propagation). Do you have any use cases in which you would want to initialize such a correlator?

Also the json output for correlators strictly assumes that all non None entries are defined on the same set of configurations. Otherwise the reassembling into a 3D array would not work. That is also why I had to implement the function _nan_Obs_like (https://github.com/fjosw/pyerrors/blob/develop/pyerrors/input/json.py#L164).

@JanNeuendorf
Copy link
Contributor Author

I could imagine someone measuring more configurations for one smearing level and still wanting to use the GEVP methods. Theoretically the new Obs can know, what configurations it was measured on (?) and be compatible. But i would not need this and if it is hard to implement, we can leave it as it is.

@fjosw
Copy link
Owner

fjosw commented Jan 27, 2022

I propose to leave the Corr.__init__ method as it is for now. If such a special case is needed in the future we can revisit this issue.

@fjosw fjosw closed this as completed Jan 27, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants