-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 27
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
new benchmark with sum of mvnorm pdfs #434
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good to me. I only added two minor comments. Just merge it when you are ready. And of course, I am interested in your benchmark results ;)
bofire/benchmarks/single.py
Outdated
), | ||
"valid_y": np.ones(len(X)), | ||
}, | ||
index=range(len(X)), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is not necessary as the index is set to the range by default.
opt_on_boundary: bool = False, | ||
N_unimportant_inputs: int = 2, | ||
means: Optional[list] = None, | ||
covmats: Optional[np.ndarray] = None, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It would be nice to also add a seed
argument of type seed: Optional[int] = None
, to be able to reproduce randomly generated response surfaces.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We should then also test in the test that it produces the same numbers when a seed is set.
I had fun experimenting with this trying to make benchmarks that I thought were similar to real problems.
Perhaps it might prove interesting and useful to others too.