Skip to content
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

document finiteness assumptions in the API #102

Open
tpapp opened this issue Jan 9, 2023 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #105
Open

document finiteness assumptions in the API #102

tpapp opened this issue Jan 9, 2023 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #105

Comments

@tpapp
Copy link
Owner

tpapp commented Jan 9, 2023

When writing this package I implicitly assumed that that whenever the log density is finite, the gradient (and now the Hessian, see #101) are also.

So calling eg logdensity_and_gradient in the context of an MCMC sampler

fx, Dfx = logdensity_and_gradient(f, x)
if isfinite(fx)
   # proceed using DfX
else
   # reject point
end

The motivation for the non-finite log density is to provide an escape hatch for x being outside the support, non-convergent solvers, etc.

Should we

  1. document that whenever the log density is finite, so are the gradient and the Hessian?

  2. or allow cases of finite log density, with potentially non-finite gradient and Hessian? (What would be the use case?)

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 a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant