Open marianklose opened 10 months ago
In case you agree with the issue described in #33, I guess it could be simply fixed within parse_model_definitions(). In the likelihood section it leads to this change in the model.stan file (if generated with write_stan_model()):
parse_model_definitions()
model.stan
write_stan_model()
original
dv_pk ~ normal(ipred_obs_pk, (ruv_prop_pk * ipred_obs_pk + ruv_add_pk));
new
dv_pk ~ normal(ipred_obs_pk, (sqrt(pow(ruv_prop_pk * ipred_obs_pk, 2) + pow(ruv_add_pk, 2))));
and similarily in the simulate_posterior section:
for(i in 1:n_obs_pk){ ipred_ruv_pk[i] = normal_rng(ipred_obs_pk[i], (ruv_prop_pk * ipred_obs_pk[i] + ruv_add_pk)); }
for(i in 1:n_obs_pk){ ipred_ruv_pk[i] = normal_rng(ipred_obs_pk[i], (sqrt(pow(ruv_prop_pk * ipred_obs_pk[i], 2) + pow(ruv_add_pk, 2)))); }
In case you agree with the issue described in #33, I guess it could be simply fixed within
parse_model_definitions()
. In the likelihood section it leads to this change in themodel.stan
file (if generated withwrite_stan_model()
):original
new
and similarily in the simulate_posterior section:
original
new