Adding small GPMSA verification example #614
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## dev #614 +/- ##
=========================================
- Coverage 75.1% 75.07% -0.03%
=========================================
Files 310 311 +1
Lines 23288 23528 +240
=========================================
+ Hits 17490 17664 +174
- Misses 5798 5864 +66
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
dmcdougall
force-pushed
the
gpmsa_pdf_verif_3x3
branch
from
7eb3e0d
to
6f3a169
Compare
This test checks that the pdf (both prior and likelihood) evaluations between matlab and queso are consistent (to within 1e-5).
dmcdougall
force-pushed
the
gpmsa_pdf_verif_3x3
branch
from
6f3a169
to
f937c27
Compare
|
|
||
| # ----- | ||
| # GPMSA Options with data precision adjusted per Brian Williams | ||
| # ----- |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Don't a few of these just match the default options?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes. I left them there just to be explicit.
test/test_gpmsa/scalar_pdf_small.C
Outdated
| // | ||
| // Regarding experimental data, the user should transformed it so that it has | ||
| // zero mean and variance one. | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
These comments are now outdated, right?
test/test_gpmsa/scalar_pdf_small.C
Outdated
| for (unsigned int j = 0; j < point.sizeLocal(); ++j) | ||
| solution_data >> point[j]; | ||
|
|
||
| double log_likelihood; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why all the intermediate variables?
test/test_gpmsa/scalar_pdf_small.C
Outdated
| } | ||
| solution_data.close(); | ||
|
|
||
| double initial_diff_prior = expected_log_priors[0] - computed_log_priors[0]; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is because our log priors are correct only up to a constant, but we expect it to be the same constant at every evaluations? We should have a comment about that.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I forgot to address this comment in this PR. I did it in #615, though.
dmcdougall
force-pushed
the
gpmsa_pdf_verif_3x3
branch
from
10ef1b6
to
48fa850
Compare
|
Should be good to do. |
Labelled as 'do not merge' until we iron out a potential issue with the normalisation of the scenario variables.