-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 19
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
Function parameter documentation #304
Conversation
0363188
to
3aade9b
Compare
846b125
to
16bede9
Compare
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.
Good PR! Added a few minor comments, but I basically think this can be merged. We can always make further improvements to the docs in the future as people start using the function parameters!
An aside:
It seems the terminology "class" or "subclass" is used a few locations throughout the documentation to describe parameter distributions both relating to function parameters, but also in general. I think it would be good to be a bit more precise to refer to these as abstract types and structs. That said, I think it's best to discuss and make those changes in a separate PR.
``` | ||
We plot 4 samples of this distribution. Samples are taken over the (30-dimensional) degrees of freedom, and then we apply the `transform_unconstrained_to_costrained` map to (i) build the function distribution, (ii) evaluate it on the numerical grid, and (iii) constrain the output with our prescribed bounds. | ||
```@example snip_fun | ||
shape = [length(pp) for pp in points] |
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.
could ndims
be used here instead to illustrate the usage of that method?
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.
the functional parameter ndims
only gives the total number of eval points, where as here for plotting we need the breakdown of # eval points per dimension. It might be worth storing this grid-shape internally however, for future use in reshaping. I'll create a separate issue, I presume it is obtainable from the GRF package.
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 have appended this into #282
function distribution docs run show(parameter_distribution) format updated from review
16bede9
to
9fcc796
Compare
I've also created an issue for the terminology #308 |
bors r+ |
Build succeeded! The publicly hosted instance of bors-ng is deprecated and will go away soon. If you want to self-host your own instance, instructions are here. If you want to switch to GitHub's built-in merge queue, visit their help page. |
Purpose
Fixes #300
Addresses GRF docs part of #282
NB this is merely documenting what is currently implemented, improvements to the API will come soon.
Content
constraint
keyword to fixbase.show()
bug with function distributionsshow(parameter_distribution)
during tests to appease codecovGaussianRandomFieldInterface
object and samples.Relevant docs section found here and here.