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

Force process grouping in theory covariance module #791

Closed
voisey opened this issue Jun 2, 2020 · 4 comments
Closed

Force process grouping in theory covariance module #791

voisey opened this issue Jun 2, 2020 · 4 comments
Assignees

Comments

@voisey
Copy link
Contributor

voisey commented Jun 2, 2020

As discussed here #651 (comment), in the theory covariance module we should force metadata_group: nnpdf31_process or at least set it as a default (maybe this is better in case someone wanted to change it down the line? Although I'm not sure if there's an obvious case when anyone would want to do that). We want to do this because otherwise the default behaviour will be to group data by experiment in constructing the theory covariance matrix, which would lead to incorrect results for all use cases we have so far, unless you manually set metadata_group: nnpdf31_process in the runcard. Note that this is waiting for #651 to be merged, but that should happen soon.

@voisey
Copy link
Contributor Author

voisey commented Sep 21, 2020

@RosalynLP Is this at all related to other things that are happening with the data keyword? If so, perhaps we should take care of this now?

@RosalynLP
Copy link
Contributor

@voisey I don't think it's related, it's a separate issue, it's more of a safeguard in case people don't add the line manually

@voisey
Copy link
Contributor Author

voisey commented Mar 2, 2021

Hey @RosalynLP, looking at #1110 it seems important that this is addressed soon. Do you agree with the sentiment of this PR?

@RosalynLP
Copy link
Contributor

Yeah needs doing soon, I agree! Will prioritise

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

No branches or pull requests

3 participants