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

g3a_renewal_vonb_t0: t0 cannot equal an age #128

Open
lentinj opened this issue Oct 20, 2023 · 5 comments
Open

g3a_renewal_vonb_t0: t0 cannot equal an age #128

lentinj opened this issue Oct 20, 2023 · 5 comments

Comments

@lentinj
Copy link
Collaborator

lentinj commented Oct 20, 2023

Whist messing with minimal modelwizard models.

Somewhat obviously in retrospect, if t0 is equal to one of our ages, then at that age the mean length will be 0. However, this is resulting in NaN's for that age.

I think the problem is g3a_initialconditions_normalcv(), and we should be avoid_zero()ing mean_f * cv_f. But I've not experimented further.

@bthe
Copy link
Collaborator

bthe commented Oct 24, 2023

I guess we can do one more, t0 can't be greater than minimum age otherwise we get negative growths. Might be worthwhile to either to set a default upper bound to 0 or set t0 as -exp(log_t0).

@lentinj
Copy link
Collaborator Author

lentinj commented Oct 24, 2023

t0 can't be greater than minimum age otherwise we get negative growths

Certainly sounds sensible but it's not a solution in itself. In initialconditions we do (age - cur_step_size) - t0, so if (like anch) you have ages 0..3 then you in effect considering age == -1. But it's quite possible that this in itself is nonsensical.

@bthe
Copy link
Collaborator

bthe commented Oct 25, 2023

Could the solution to this dilemma be to restrict the initial conditions to run only for ages minage + 1 and above and let the recruitment do its thing when that happens.

@lentinj
Copy link
Collaborator Author

lentinj commented Oct 25, 2023

I seem to remember @willbutler42 doing something similar to avoid double recruitment in the first step, although not sure where now.

@willbutler42
Copy link
Collaborator

I seem to remember @willbutler42 doing something similar to avoid double recruitment in the first step, although not sure where now.

Will get back to you tomorrow regarding this

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

3 participants