Skip to content

Conversation

@Franzi2114
Copy link
Collaborator

@Franzi2114 Franzi2114 commented Mar 29, 2024

Summary

With this PR the CDF and the CCDF of the 7-parameter diffuion model are added.
See issue #2966
Relates to issue #2822

Tests

We implemented analogous tests as for the PDF

Side Effects

no

Release notes

CDF and CCDF for the 7-parameter diffusion model. Allows modeling truncated and censored data.

Checklist

  • Copyright holder: Franziska Henrich, Christoph Klauer

    The copyright holder is typically you or your assignee, such as a university or company. By submitting this pull request, the copyright holder is agreeing to the license the submitted work under the following licenses:
    - Code: BSD 3-clause (https://opensource.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause)
    - Documentation: CC-BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

  • the basic tests are passing

    • unit tests pass (to run, use: ./runTests.py test/unit)
    • header checks pass, (make test-headers)
    • dependencies checks pass, (make test-math-dependencies)
    • docs build, (make doxygen)
    • code passes the built in C++ standards checks (make cpplint)
  • the code is written in idiomatic C++ and changes are documented in the doxygen

  • the new changes are tested

@Franzi2114 Franzi2114 requested a review from SteveBronder March 29, 2024 18:41
@WardBrian
Copy link
Member

Just chiming in to add a reminder that we discussed naming these functions something other than _l[c]cdf, both for clarity and to avoid them being candidates for the truncation syntax when added to Stanc3. I don't immediately recall if we had an alternative we liked

@Franzi2114
Copy link
Collaborator Author

naming these functions something other than _l[c]cdf

@WardBrian, @bob-carpenter
Which name would you suggest instead of wiener_lcdf. Something like wiener_lcdf_defective? Then it would be clear that it is a defective implementation. In variants which are shorter it could become confusing, like wiener_lcdf_def.

@WardBrian
Copy link
Member

naming these functions something other than _l[c]cdf

@WardBrian, @bob-carpenter Which name would you suggest instead of wiener_lcdf. Something like wiener_lcdf_defective? Then it would be clear that it is a defective implementation

That would be fine. We could also introduce a new suffix like ldcdf where the d was short for defective, but as you say that could be confusing. If we thought we'd be adding a bunch more defective cdfs in the future, then it would make sense to establish the convention, but assuming we don't plan to, I think the longer name is fine

@Franzi2114
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@bob-carpenter
Dear Bob, I am through with all your points! I marked everything that I implemented as resolved. There are about 10 comments where I had questions.

How shall we continue? Do you want to go through my questions or through your comments and say which one has to be worked on again?

I think that the tests should finish successfully tomorrow. If not, I will have another look into the error messages during the next days.

What is still missing is the renaming of the wiener_cdf functions. When all tests pass, I will rename the functions accordingly.
Best, Franzi

@bob-carpenter
Copy link
Member

Thanks. I'll take a look at the questions and we can proceed in parallel. I'm guessing a lot of them will just be due to my misunderstanding.

@Franzi2114
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@bob-carpenter, there is an error message in the continuous-integration test that I do not understand. Do you have a hint what this message means and where it could come from?

@bob-carpenter
Copy link
Member

bob-carpenter commented Nov 6, 2025 via email

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants