Open joshualeond opened 5 years ago
Hi Josh,
Thanks for the feedback!
Having a digits=...
argument is a good suggestion.
On your 2nd question, the approach taken in MCMCChains is slightly different in that you can adjust the chain's name_map, e.g. in your example:
chns = set_section(chn, Dict(
:pooled => ["a[$i]" for i in 1:6]
)
It means an extra step, but given a slightly more elaborate example:
chns = set_section(chn, Dict(
:parameters => ["mu", "tau"],
:thetas => ["theta.$i" for i in 1:8],
:etas => ["eta.$i" for i in 1:8],
:internals => ["lp__", "accept_stat__", "stepsize__", "treedepth__", "n_leapfrog__",
"divergent__", "energy__"]
)
)
for models with lots and lots of parameters it allows finer control.
I had asked in the Turing slack channel if there were a simple way to adjust the precision of the
describe
methods output. I was told there isn't and to open a feature request. Currently we see something like this with thedescribe
method:The keyword argument would adjust the level of precision on this output. Something like this, with an additional
digits
argument:While we're discussing the output of the
describe
method. Maybe it would be advantageous to include adepth
argument as well. An example of this is in the rethinking package in R. Here's a description of the argument in therethinking::precis
function:A quick example of the differences with
depth
: