Skip to content

Implement check_icdf helper to test icdf implementations #6583

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

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Mar 13, 2023

Conversation

ricardoV94
Copy link
Member

@ricardoV94 ricardoV94 commented Mar 9, 2023

For use in #6528

Also cleaned up the check_logp like helpers

CC @michaelraczycki

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 9, 2023

Codecov Report

Merging #6583 (9ef9a14) into main (457421b) will decrease coverage by 0.02%.
The diff coverage is 96.40%.

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #6583      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   92.03%   92.02%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files          92       92              
  Lines       15539    15561      +22     
==========================================
+ Hits        14302    14320      +18     
- Misses       1237     1241       +4     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
pymc/pytensorf.py 92.34% <81.81%> (+0.01%) ⬆️
pymc/testing.py 91.84% <97.27%> (-0.09%) ⬇️
pymc/distributions/continuous.py 97.69% <100.00%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️
pymc/distributions/discrete.py 98.72% <100.00%> (-0.51%) ⬇️
pymc/distributions/dist_math.py 87.91% <100.00%> (+0.48%) ⬆️
pymc/logprob/utils.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

... and 3 files with indirect coverage changes

@ricardoV94 ricardoV94 force-pushed the improve_check_parameters branch from 6b7da71 to 48a8765 Compare March 9, 2023 13:18
@ricardoV94 ricardoV94 marked this pull request as draft March 10, 2023 17:24
@ricardoV94
Copy link
Member Author

Didn't notice some tests were failing

@michaelosthege michaelosthege marked this pull request as ready for review March 10, 2023 18:41
@ricardoV94 ricardoV94 force-pushed the improve_check_parameters branch 3 times, most recently from 7cf8312 to 3464fe4 Compare March 13, 2023 12:02
@ricardoV94 ricardoV94 force-pushed the improve_check_parameters branch from 3464fe4 to b1b12c8 Compare March 13, 2023 14:14
@ricardoV94 ricardoV94 force-pushed the improve_check_parameters branch from b1b12c8 to 006e0f9 Compare March 13, 2023 15:25
Note that adding a nan switch to the icdf expression of discrete variables, prevents the returned dtype to be the same as the original distribution. There is no integer nan!
@ricardoV94 ricardoV94 force-pushed the improve_check_parameters branch from 006e0f9 to 9ef9a14 Compare March 13, 2023 15:58
Copy link
Member

@michaelosthege michaelosthege left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@ricardoV94 ricardoV94 merged commit 4da5edf into pymc-devs:main Mar 13, 2023
michaelraczycki added a commit to michaelraczycki/pymc that referenced this pull request Mar 18, 2023
@ricardoV94 ricardoV94 deleted the improve_check_parameters branch April 7, 2023 05:52
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants