Open paul-buerkner opened 5 years ago
For what it's worth, from one user's perspective, I find the different prefixes less useful than having the same prefix. Different prefixes lead to what seem unnecessary complications when postprocessing the model's output (as you note with tidy()
, for example).
I'm not quite sure, but I think that everything that makes sense to get an own "paragraph" or section in the output, e.g. from summary()
, is worth having its own unique prefix to be distinguishable. It should then be the task of packages like broom.mixed to clean the output.
That would be an argument for aligning the prefixes I guess since the regression coefficients of special predictor types are nowhere explicitly differentiated from the basic regression coefficients in a user-facing function.
As far as I remember, simplex parameters are printed separately from the remaining coefficients, so I would give them different prefixes.
The simplex parameters of monotonic effects are not "regression coefficients" under my personal definition and as such are not under discussion. They will, of course, keep their simo_
prefix.
However, the scale parameters of monotonic effects have regression coefficient like properties and currently share the prefix bsp_
with other special coefficients. Those may be change to b_
at some point.
Ah, I forgot. I confused this, thought that simplex parameters were starting with bsp
. But yes, than I would suggest aligning the prefixes you mentioned.
Currently, "standard" regression coefficients have the
b_
prefix, while special coefficients such as monotonic effects havebsp_
, and category-specific effects havebcs_
. For several applications outside of brms itself, it may be better to make them all use theb_
prefix (e.g., see https://github.com/bbolker/broom.mixed/issues/45), but it may break backwards compatibility if users directly target the parameter names. Any opinions are welcome. Bringing @jgabry and @bgoodri into the discussion.