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

Behavior for conflicts between shared parameters #2600

Open
kmantel opened this issue Feb 8, 2023 · 0 comments
Open

Behavior for conflicts between shared parameters #2600

kmantel opened this issue Feb 8, 2023 · 0 comments

Comments

@kmantel
Copy link
Collaborator

kmantel commented Feb 8, 2023

For the following example in the documentation,

>>> my_linear_tm = pnl.TransferMechanism(integrator_function=AdaptiveIntegrator(rate=0.3),
...                                      integration_rate=0.1)
>>> my_linear_tm.integration_rate 
(TransferMechanism TransferMechanism-8):
    integration_rate.base: 0.3
    integration_rate.modulated: [0.3]

We currently prioritize the shared parameter value specified on the function (rate) rather than that on its owner (integration_rate) when there is a conflict. When revisiting this question recently, it seemed that it would be better to prioritize the value on the owner rather than the function, in part because the function acts as a template. We should recall why this decision was originally made and whether it makes sense to change it.

kmantel added a commit to kmantel/PsyNeuLink that referenced this issue Feb 9, 2023
Shared with its function initializer. Changes conflict behavior to be
consistent with other SharedParameters (function value favored over
owner value). For discussion on this, see
PrincetonUniversity#2600
kmantel added a commit to kmantel/PsyNeuLink that referenced this issue Feb 10, 2023
Shared with its function initializer. Changes conflict behavior to be
consistent with other SharedParameters (function value favored over
owner value). For discussion on this, see
PrincetonUniversity#2600
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

1 participant