-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5
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
Abandon AbstractLink
type
#43
Comments
We could still dispatch analytic implementations of expected_loglik etc on |
How about creating a
? |
Just so I understand better, what do we gain from defining e.g. ExpLink explicitly (rather than "only" having GenericLink(exp))? |
We are able to tell what the corresponding inverse |
An alternative would be to add an API like inverse_link(::typeof(exp)) = log
inverse_link(::typeof(log)) = exp
inverse_link(::typeof(log1pexp)) = logexpm1
inverse_link(::typeof(logexpm1)) = log1pexp that would allow us to define Base.inv(l::GenericLink) = GenericLink(inverse_link(l.f)) |
This was referenced Oct 7, 2021
Merged
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
All that I need to specify a likelihood is the mapping from f to a distribution, and in many cases the only degree of freedom is the inverse link function: it would be super convenient if I could just write
PoissonLikelihood(log1pexp)
to try out a softplus invlink, without having to code up a subtype of AbstractLink and having to remember what I have to do to implement it.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: