Open lukasheinrich opened 3 years ago
With pyhf
0.6.3 and iminuit
2.8.2 I get a slightly better result using the code above:
[0.02092916 0.0063749 ]
[3.07345898e-19 6.20569308e-06]
where [0 0]
is expected.
I think the failure is due to the best-fit point being at the parameter boundary. When extending bounds to [-10, 20]
, the result is
[0.00025564 0.00021155]
[-0.00022858 0.00029254]
and the HESSE and MINOS errors match well (the HESSE errors are nonsensical without that boundary change).
For completeness, here is the addition to turn the model config into a workspace with the boundary changed:
"measurements": [
{
"config": {
"parameters": [{"bounds": [[-10, 20]], "inits": [1], "name": "mu"}],
"poi": "mu",
},
"name": "meas",
}
],
"observations": [{"data": [50], "name": "singlechannel"}],
"version": "1.0.0",
Suggestion for a possible concrete action: maybe add a warning if result_obj.minuit.fmin.has_parameters_at_limit
is True
after a fit.
Summary
Fairly easy histosys + normfactor model, but our minuit settings aren't great.. any tips @alexander-held ? (I saw it first in cabinetry but realized it's the minuit backend)
OS / Environment
Steps to Reproduce
see above
File Upload (optional)
No response
Expected Results
this should work trivially :-/
Actual Results
pyhf Version
Code of Conduct