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

Adjustment term specification for analysis models #16

Open
erex opened this issue May 21, 2021 · 1 comment
Open

Adjustment term specification for analysis models #16

erex opened this issue May 21, 2021 · 1 comment
Assignees
Labels
enhancement New feature or request low priority Low priority

Comments

@erex
Copy link
Member

erex commented May 21, 2021

There are no arguments to make.ds.analysis that allows the user to specify adjustment terms. I don't know how often users will want to explore models with adjustment terms, so it might not be a big deal. Of course if there are covariates in detection functions, the adjustment terms would be shut off.

  • it this intentional?
  • class DS.Analysis carries slots for adjustments
  • the call to ds carries an adjustments argument
@LHMarshall LHMarshall self-assigned this May 25, 2021
@LHMarshall LHMarshall added the low priority Low priority label Jul 13, 2021
@LHMarshall
Copy link
Member

I cannot neatly add new slots to classes later so the slot was created so that this can be implemented at a later date.

When this is implemented the option to enforce strict monotonicity will also need to be implemented for stability. See this issue

@LHMarshall LHMarshall reopened this Jul 15, 2021
@lenthomas lenthomas added the enhancement New feature or request label May 10, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request low priority Low priority
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants