Tests for equivalence of sratio() and cratio() in case of symmetric distribution functions
#1153
Conversation
…mmetric distribution functions and that cumulative() and sratio() give the same results for the cloglog link (the latter equivalence currently does not hold).
…ive() and sratio() for the cloglog link (see <paul-buerkner#1137 (comment)>).
|
Thanks for opening this PR! I would prefer these tests to live in |
|
Sure, I'll check that. I wasn't 100% sure if I put everything at the correct (or most appropriate) place. Another remark: Commit d9266cc is just a leftover fragment from some of my local code. I thought that additional unit test could not harm (especially because it doesn't need a new fit, so it's computationally inexpensive), but if you don't want it, just remove it. In any case, it's not complete (as it only tests the |
… for `brmsfit_example7`.
…ifying `.Random.seed`.
… the corresponding test to `tests/local/tests.models_new.R` (see <paul-buerkner#1153 (comment)> why).
|
I now moved |
|
Great, thank you! Can you remove the commented out cloglog tests please? I don't really want this to be in the code base at the moment even if commented out. |
|
I removed the commented-out tests and will merge this PR after checks are passing locally. |
|
Thanks! Sorry for not replying—I was just away from my computer. |
|
no worries :-)
Am Do., 6. Mai 2021 um 16:29 Uhr schrieb Frank Weber <
***@***.***>:
… Thanks! Sorry for not replying—I was just away from my computer.
—
You are receiving this because you modified the open/close state.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#1153 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADCW2AE6TUFQKYHR765BYXTTMKRTDANCNFSM44FBIH2A>
.
|
This is the PR for enumeration points 4 and 5 of this comment (see also this comment for an explanation why I commented out the tests for the equivalence of
sratio()andcumulative()in case of the cloglog link).