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

Add benefit test that compares actual and target benefit amounts/counts #246

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Jul 12, 2018
Merged

Add benefit test that compares actual and target benefit amounts/counts #246

merged 4 commits into from
Jul 12, 2018

Conversation

martinholmer
Copy link
Contributor

This pull request adds a benefit test that tries to do the same comparison as was done in issue #241: that is, compare actual aggregate benefit amounts and counts (filing units receiving the benefit) with target benefit amounts and counts for each year after the start year. The target amounts/counts are the start year amounts/counts blown-up by the factors in the cps_stage4/growth_rates.csv file. The actual amounts/counts are derived from the extrapolated-benefit information in the cps_stage4/cps_benefits.csv.gz file. All the amounts and counts are weighted.

The new test was developed off the master branch (before pull request #242 was merged), so the results of the new test are difficult to interpret. The plan is that after this pull request has been reviewed and merged, the new master branch will be merged into pull request #242. Only then will the test results provide guidance on the quality of the extrapolated benefits.

Right now, in order to make the new test pass, the relative tolerance for actual-vs-target differences has to be set to a 0.15 value. Hopefully, when the new test is merged into pending pull request #242, the new test will pass when assuming a much lower value for the relative tolerance.

@andersonfrailey @hdoupe @MattHJensen

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant