You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Right now the likelihoods in firecrown require a sacc object to compute anything. It would be nice to have a utility likelihood that takes in a list of ell (or theta) values, a collection of n(z), what kind of statistic should be computed, and then assembles a corresponding sacc object internally. That likelihood would then just compute the predicted data vector and not implement compute_chisq.
The use case I have in mind is model exploration and testing, for which a measured data vector and covariance is not necessary and adds an unnecessary burden on the user to set up a sacc object themselves.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I'd like to revisit this. Right now the GaussFamily likelihoods need a sacc file with a data vector and covariance. For model development and testing, this is not necessary and might be bothersome to obtain (especially the covariance).
I'd like a Likelihood class that just implements
read but only loops over the statistics and calls stat.read on them
compute_theory_vector
make_realization
It's not clear how to implement that cleanly with the current setup though. I think it would be natural to subclass Likelihood for this but both compute_theory_vector and make_realisation are already implemented in GaussFamily and wouldn't need to be changed. On the other hand, GaussFamily has a lot of other functionality that makes no sense if there are no data vectors or covariances. An option would be to have something like a TheoryOnlyLikelihood that is a subclass of Likelihood, which implements a rudimentary read, as well as compute_theory_vector and make_realisation. GaussFamily then subclasses TheoryOnlyLikelihood.
Right now the likelihoods in firecrown require a sacc object to compute anything. It would be nice to have a utility likelihood that takes in a list of ell (or theta) values, a collection of n(z), what kind of statistic should be computed, and then assembles a corresponding sacc object internally. That likelihood would then just compute the predicted data vector and not implement
compute_chisq
.The use case I have in mind is model exploration and testing, for which a measured data vector and covariance is not necessary and adds an unnecessary burden on the user to set up a sacc object themselves.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: