-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 19
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Adding Examples of single event runs #133
Adding Examples of single event runs #133
Conversation
fcb2651
to
645dea1
Compare
…m-class-from-prior-class 98 moving naming tracking into jim class from prior class
Fix test
Btw, we may want to remove legacy examples either in this PR or another new PR. |
We can remove legacy example in this PR |
|
||
M_c_min, M_c_max = 10.0, 80.0 | ||
q_min, q_max = 0.125, 1.0 | ||
m_1_prior = UniformPrior(Mc_q_to_m1_m2(M_c_min, q_max)[0], Mc_q_to_m1_m2(M_c_max, q_min)[0], parameter_names=["m_1"]) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This does not corresponds to Mc_max =80.0, please check for accuracy
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think this is related to the fact that when you sample from UniformPrior
, it just randomly gives you a value within the range you have defined. Now, without any constraint, the range of m_1
and m_2
overlaps with each other, so m_2
can be bigger than m_1
when you try to sample on it. When m_2
is bigger than m_1
, it gives strange value of M_c
and q
.
I think its better to build a special prior class for m_1
and m_2
, in which we add the constraint m_1
> m_2
in sampling.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think the value looks fine to me. I can test it with @xuyuon tomorrow.
BoundToUnbound(name_mapping = [["phase_c"], ["phase_c_unbounded"]] , original_lower_bound=0.0, original_upper_bound=2 * jnp.pi), | ||
BoundToUnbound(name_mapping = [["iota"], ["iota_unbounded"]], original_lower_bound=0., original_upper_bound=jnp.pi), | ||
BoundToUnbound(name_mapping = [["psi"], ["psi_unbounded"]], original_lower_bound=0.0, original_upper_bound=jnp.pi), | ||
SkyFrameToDetectorFrameSkyPositionTransform(name_mapping = [["ra", "dec"], ["zenith", "azimuth"]], gps_time=gps, ifos=ifos), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This does not work with the new predefined transform. Please change accordingly
I am going to close this PR, and separate it into two new PR. |
nan
in Adam optimization and ruin the run.GW150914_D.py
,GW150914_D_heterodyne.py
,GW150914_Pv2.py