-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 283
Bayesian Workflow with SEMs #807
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
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Nathaniel <[email protected]>
Check out this pull request on See visual diffs & provide feedback on Jupyter Notebooks. Powered by ReviewNB |
Signed-off-by: Nathaniel <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Nathaniel <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Nathaniel <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Nathaniel <[email protected]>
I would ditch the Rhat plots -- all the action is in a tiny region just above 1.0, so most of the plot is irrelevant. |
Signed-off-by: Nathaniel <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Nathaniel <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Nathaniel <[email protected]>
@ricardoV94 , not looking for a review, just wondering about the shape handling in the MvNormal after pymc 5.17. If you see above i have a hierarchical SEM model which uses an indexing trick to pass group specific covariance structures to the likelihood. While this works in 5.17 see above it breaks in 5.30... is that a bug, or intended behaviour. Do you know how i could replicate the results with 5.30+? |
Bayesian Workflow with SEMs
Related to proposal here
#806
Helpful links
📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://pymc-examples--807.org.readthedocs.build/en/807/