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

WIP SharkFinAgentType #101

Open
wants to merge 7 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

alanlujan91
Copy link
Collaborator

Initial PortfolioSharkFinAgentType

Addresses #85. More methods might be needed to interact with Agent Population and AgentSolution

initial PortfolioSharkFinAgentType
sharkfin/population.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@sbenthall
Copy link
Owner

Good start. Is this still WIP?

@alanlujan91
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Yes. We can use this as the structure to build from. Once this is merged, the new AgentPopulation will be adapted to interact with this object instead of the HARK agents.

@alanlujan91 alanlujan91 linked an issue Jan 25, 2023 that may be closed by this pull request
@sbenthall
Copy link
Owner

There's a merge conflict for this PR.
Otherwise, is it ready to merge?

@alanlujan91
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I'll fix the conflict ASAP.

This is a good start for SharkFinAgentType, but I think more needs to be done.

Right now there is only one simulate method. Perhaps there should be 2. One for a macro day and one for an activity day so that we can have more fine tuning control of when changes to income are happening, when consumption is happening, and when normalization is happening. This also needs integration into the methods that are SHARK specific like attend and compute share demand.

@sbenthall
Copy link
Owner

OK, super. Thank you!
It would make sense to track the remaining scope on the issue #85
I am eager to merge this PR because it has your commit that restores functionality after the 'discretize' change, but if you'd rather this PR to remain WIP, you could maybe make a separate PR for that change?

@alanlujan91
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@sbenthall the discretize issue was fixed in #191 and already merged

@sbenthall
Copy link
Owner

Oh, whoops. My bad, thanks.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
2 participants