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
During some recent testing, I noticed that the GP likelihood optimization procedure seems to run into problems when there are duplicate locs (which is likely to be a common occurrence in multivariate models if two outcomes are measured at the same location). I kept getting warnings that the matrices were numerically singular, and usually the procedure would eventually crash. The obvious solution seems to be to add a small amount of noise to the locs to ensure that there are no duplicates. I tried that and it seems to fix the issue. We are already doing this when picking the nearest neighbors (and GPvecchia does the same thing in that case). I am inclined to simply add some noise to the locs at the beginning of vecchia_Mspecify and simply replace the original locs with the "noised up" version for the rest of the model fitting procedure. Let me know if anyone sees a problem with that approach.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
During some recent testing, I noticed that the GP likelihood optimization procedure seems to run into problems when there are duplicate locs (which is likely to be a common occurrence in multivariate models if two outcomes are measured at the same location). I kept getting warnings that the matrices were numerically singular, and usually the procedure would eventually crash. The obvious solution seems to be to add a small amount of noise to the locs to ensure that there are no duplicates. I tried that and it seems to fix the issue. We are already doing this when picking the nearest neighbors (and GPvecchia does the same thing in that case). I am inclined to simply add some noise to the locs at the beginning of vecchia_Mspecify and simply replace the original locs with the "noised up" version for the rest of the model fitting procedure. Let me know if anyone sees a problem with that approach.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: