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

Re-write choiceRT_lba models for new package structure #91

Open
dlemfh opened this issue Jul 7, 2019 · 3 comments
Open

Re-write choiceRT_lba models for new package structure #91

dlemfh opened this issue Jul 7, 2019 · 3 comments
Labels
Milestone

Comments

@dlemfh
Copy link
Contributor

dlemfh commented Jul 7, 2019

The (two) choiceRT_lba models are written in a different way from the rest of the models. (Hence they do not make use of hBayesDM_model base function in R package.) Therefore, these models also cannot make use of base.py in the Python package.

Must either refactor the choiceRT_lba models to make use of the base function/class, or maintain these two models separately from all the other models of hBayesDM.

Currently, (while the two are included in the R package), choiceRT_lba & choiceRT_lba_single are not included in the Python package.

@JaeyeongYang
Copy link
Contributor

It would be better to implement two models from the first, suitable for our novel structure of hBayesDM package. For now, I will get rid of two models from the R package so to make both R and Python packages have the same number of models.

@JaeyeongYang JaeyeongYang changed the title Write (two) choiceRT_lba models for Python Re-write choiceRT_lba models for new package structure Aug 23, 2019
@JaeyeongYang JaeyeongYang added this to the v1.1 milestone Sep 4, 2019
@mspezio
Copy link

mspezio commented Feb 25, 2021

Have you made any decisions about whether the LBA models will be added back to R or added to Python? Right now, the help pages for hBayesDM in R show the 2 LBA models but of course they are no longer available.

@JaeyeongYang
Copy link
Contributor

Sorry for the late reply, @mspezio. I'm afraid that we haven't made any decisions yet, and this issue happened to get slipped from our mind in the latest version (v1.1).

Let us solve this issue in the next upcoming version. Thanks for reminding us. :)

@JaeyeongYang JaeyeongYang modified the milestones: v1.1, v1.2 Mar 8, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants