-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3
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
Support for irregular time series #223
Conversation
Codecov ReportBase: 100.00% // Head: 100.00% // No change to project coverage 👍
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #223 +/- ##
=========================================
Coverage 100.00% 100.00%
=========================================
Files 29 29
Lines 2834 2840 +6
=========================================
+ Hits 2834 2840 +6
Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here. ☔ View full report at Codecov. |
R/particle_filter_data.R
Outdated
stop(sprintf("The first time must be at least 1 (but was given %d)", | ||
model_time_end[[1L]])) | ||
if (any(model_time_end < 0)) { | ||
## This condition is actually only required for discrete time |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
but this isn't wrapped in a check to allow it for continuous models?
## models; for continuous time models this would be fine. | ||
stop("'initial_time' must be non-negative") | ||
} | ||
if (initial_time > model_time_end[[1L]]) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
why was this check previously against model_time_end[[1L] - 1
?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm think this was that we used to require at least one time interval to have passed before the first data period, because we used to have the compare function take the current state and the previous state (so that cumulative variables could be converted into differences between reporting periods). But not entirely sure really, and it's certainly a complication that no longer seems required
Fixes #97