Closed jerrayc closed 2 years ago
@jerrayc Should the names for lambda/tau start at 1? I thought the coefficients corresponded to estimates from the second level onward.
@jerrayc Should the names for lambda/tau start at 1? I thought the coefficients corresponded to estimates from the second level onward.
Ah I see what you mean. I think it's better to start indexing with 1, since there does not exist a tauhat for level k = 1. If we want to change our numbering of k to more clearly parallel our indexing starting at 1, I would be down to make those adjustments.
In practice we don't use the level k=1 since it is the control group, so in my head I index that as 0, while the rest of the treatments start with 1, 2, etc. I think this is more in line with what the theory note writes and is less confusing, since there does not exist a tauhat for k = 1 and it seems weird to start indexing at 2. Does that make sense?
@jerrayc Should the names for lambda/tau start at 1? I thought the coefficients corresponded to estimates from the second level onward.
Ah I see what you mean. I think it's better to start indexing with 1, since there does not exist a tauhat for level k = 1. If we want to change our numbering of k to more clearly parallel our indexing starting at 1, I would be down to make those adjustments.
In practice we don't use the level k=1 since it is the control group, so in my head I index that as 0, while the rest of the treatments start with 1, 2, etc. I think this is more in line with what the theory note writes and is less confusing, since there does not exist a tauhat for k = 1 and it seems weird to start indexing at 2. Does that make sense?
Ok. I defer to you here. Feel free to squash and merge if there's nothing more on your end. Thanks!
Complete translation (#1 ) + additional option to save tauhat and lambda