Open yumengch opened 11 months ago
Hi! I think indeed there is something suboptimal about this convention. I made the choice about it very early on, when I was still relatively inexperienced with Python vs Matlab. I'm a bit busy now, but will try to say something more soon!
Yes, I completely agree with you. At the time of making the choice I was too amateur with python and felt that kko[Ko]
(rather than kko[-1]
) would be valuable.
PR would be welcome. Grepping for Ko
turns up 82 counts, but there might be other more subtle/implicit hardcoded dependencies on the convention, perhaps necessitating further grepping for len
.
Hi Patrick
I understand this might be trivial but I feel this can help others better understand the time handling in DAPPER. I find the definition of
HMM.tseq.Ko
a bit confusing.I can understand that the whole trajectory is
K+1
withK
being the number of forecast time steps (len(kk) == len(tt) == K + 1
), and1
is the initial condition.But the logic of having
len(kko) == len(tto) == Ko+1
is unclear to me. The only reason that I can think of is to match the definition ofK
. However, we don't have any observation values at initial step, so in the end, when I try to describeKo
, it is always the number of observations minus one. I feel this is an unconventional concept.