You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Forcing monotonicity is a great idea but will fail at the current state if for any integer number less or equal to the comparison range, all samples violate the monotonicity constraint. In this case no support for the fit is present and, therefore, an exception is thrown during estimation.
To overcome this, we should reconsider monotonicity enforcement:
Omit it completely
Leave it as is with an adaptive range or filling in values for which no support is present
Enforce monotonicity only on the fit, not on the samples that contribute to the fit.
Going with 3 in combination with an adaptive range makes the most sense to me.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Forcing monotonicity is a great idea but will fail at the current state if for any integer number less or equal to the comparison range, all samples violate the monotonicity constraint. In this case no support for the fit is present and, therefore, an exception is thrown during estimation.
To overcome this, we should reconsider monotonicity enforcement:
Going with 3 in combination with an adaptive range makes the most sense to me.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: