-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 92
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
QC for OutOfAfrica_4J17 #1246
QC for OutOfAfrica_4J17 #1246
Conversation
I should also say that my first commit on this branch is the model as I originally implemented it, and the second commit is the tweaks I mentioned above (switching generation times to integers, and switching to |
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1246 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 99.56% 99.57%
=======================================
Files 103 103
Lines 3248 3296 +48
Branches 415 415
=======================================
+ Hits 3234 3282 +48
Misses 6 6
Partials 8 8
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
ran black to fix some formatting nonsense
missed that `black` added some whitespace in GladsteinAshkSubstructure the previous commit that I have now removed. I think that should do it!
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.
LGTM, thanks @jeffspence.
Conversion to intergers is fine here. It makes sense in the context, and there will be no practical difference in simulation output as a result.
This can be dealt with by using the
Great! I'm going to merge this without squashing, because your first model version could be useful. Thanks! |
QC for #733 (@grahamgower)
This is my first time doing QC -- so let me know if I'm doing anything wrong. I was able to (blind) replicate the model. The only issues I ran into were:
9e3/29
but that caused the tests to fail. I could get the tests to pass if I changed this toint(9e3/29)
. The models are inferred bymoments
which assumes discrete (hence integer) generations so I guess that makes sense, but since they only report to the precision of 9kya, it's not clear whether it makes sense to convert to an integer or not.msprime
API to specify the population splits (add_population_split
) but that caused one of the populations to become "inactive" which caused the tests to fail. I could get around this by switching to the old style of specifying the equivalent population splits as mass migrations, plus setting migration rates to zero. I guess this is maybe a personal preference kind of thing, so I'm happy to go either way.otherwise my initial implementation matched the current implementation.