The most elegant solution in the project was:
I think the most elegant solution was to question 4. Your answer is very thorough and your approach to the question is well described. Maybe the 3d plot (Figure 5) is a bit overkill, but it does look nice.
The hardest section of code in the project to understand was:
Overall, the code seems relatively easy to understand. You could perhaps state a bit more explicitly what the differences are between HSM.py and NHSM.py in the NHSM.py file. It would increase the readability.
This part of the project could be better documented:
In question 5 it could be an idea to explain $\nu$ and $\eta$ a bit more, since this is what is changed compared to the original utility function.
An idea for an improvement/clarification could be:
You could maybe add some comments to your functions e.g. solve_wF_vec, run_regression, estimate, est etc.
An idea for an extension could be:
Not quite sure. The project is in general very good, and with code that is straight forward to run.
The most elegant solution in the project was: I think the most elegant solution was to question 4. Your answer is very thorough and your approach to the question is well described. Maybe the 3d plot (Figure 5) is a bit overkill, but it does look nice.
The hardest section of code in the project to understand was: Overall, the code seems relatively easy to understand. You could perhaps state a bit more explicitly what the differences are between HSM.py and NHSM.py in the NHSM.py file. It would increase the readability.
This part of the project could be better documented: In question 5 it could be an idea to explain $\nu$ and $\eta$ a bit more, since this is what is changed compared to the original utility function.
An idea for an improvement/clarification could be: You could maybe add some comments to your functions e.g. solve_wF_vec, run_regression, estimate, est etc.
An idea for an extension could be: Not quite sure. The project is in general very good, and with code that is straight forward to run.