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
For scans (e.g. 1-d nutau norm, 2-d contours, ...) we always start the minimizer from nominal, but it would converge much faster if started from a neighboring best-fit point.
Example: when we scan nutau norm from 0 to 2 in steps of 0.1, then we can do a first fit at 0 starting from nominal settings, and then use this bestfit value to seed the next fit at 0.1, and so forth.....could save quite some time
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Nice. I see two limitations of this idea, however:
Scan has to be run sequentially
One has to trust the first best-fit point to reflect the global optimum, otherwise one could systematically end up in neighbouring local minima and possibly not even notice since the scan could look smooth (while random/nominal seeds would likely lead to the recovery of the global optimum for some scan points, but end up in local minima for others)
I agree with these points. The first one is at least the case when we do nutau trials, we throw one pseudodata and then scan the whole range from left to right in one job.
The second point is of course the one that would need validation, and might also work for one kind of analysis and not the other...so for your NSI maybe not (?)
Just putting this idea here not to forget:
For scans (e.g. 1-d nutau norm, 2-d contours, ...) we always start the minimizer from nominal, but it would converge much faster if started from a neighboring best-fit point.
Example: when we scan nutau norm from 0 to 2 in steps of 0.1, then we can do a first fit at 0 starting from nominal settings, and then use this bestfit value to seed the next fit at 0.1, and so forth.....could save quite some time
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: