-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 7
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
Clarify chain_ll()
documentation
#75
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #75 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 96.23% 96.25% +0.01%
==========================================
Files 5 5
Lines 239 240 +1
==========================================
+ Hits 230 231 +1
Misses 9 9
📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more |
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.
Looks good to me - thanks!
All the changes look good. A note for future PRs, if you feature branch is behind main (as was the case for this PR) it is better to rebase the feature branch onto the head of main. This provides a cleaner commit history by removing the merge commit. |
True although as a counterargument they require a force push (and sometimes resolving conflicts across multiple commits) which can be more involved / harder to track down problems. |
I agree that both methods have their advantages & disadvantages. I'm just parroting the Epiverse protocol explained in blueprints. |
483d556
to
3756587
Compare
This PR seeks to clarify the documentation of
chain_ll()
so that it states that the function is used to estimate log-likelihoods, not likelihoods. All occurrences of "likelihood" have been replaced with "log-likelihood" in the documentation.This PR closes #73.