Run UF figure 1 tutorial with real parameters

[bstraus1]

Goal: see if the results with the real parameters are comparable to the UF paper.

[levinwil]

@bstraus1 this seems to be related to #62

Is that correct? If so, could you please close this issue and make a comment with your tasking on #62

[bstraus1]

I'm unclear on what #62 is exactly. Can you elaborate?

[levinwil]

My impression is that it means to reproduce all the UF notebooks (including UF fig 1) using ProgL functions. It seems as if that is what your goal is here. Would you say that is the case?

[bstraus1]

Not the case here. Currently the fig1 notebook already uses ProgL functions. This issue is for running it with the real parameters rather than the test parameters using a machine with more computational power.

[levinwil]

Which notebook is the fig1 notebook? Please link that in a comment, because I don’t know which notebook you are referring to.

I know your issue is to use the real parameters rather than the tutorial parameters. That means that, with the real parameters that should be exactly the parameters of the notebook used to generate fig1, your goal is to reproduce the results of the UF paper fig 1 but with ProgLearn functions, as the title of #62 suggests.

[bstraus1]

The notebook using ProgL functions is already written here. It just needs to be run on some more powerful machine.

[levinwil]

So that is the tutorial notebook. Please correct me if I am wrong but I believe you are simply rerunning this notebook but with the parameters that match those used to generate the UF paper fig 1. In that case, you are literally reproducing a UF paper fig result, but with ProgLearn function. That is exactly the tasking for issue #62

If that is the case, this issue is related to 62 and therefore you should comment on #62 with your tasking and close this issue please.

[bstraus1]

#62 has no description and the title isn't well-worded. If it means to rerun tutorials that already use ProgL functions on real parameters, then yes #321 falls under #62. Otherwise, it does not.

[levinwil]

1. By “real parameters” do you mean those used to generate figures? If so, please call them “paper parameters” or something along those lines - that is much more clear. Similarly, I believe that by “test parameters” you mean parameters used to generate tutorials. If so, please call them “tutorial parameters” for similar reasons.
2. re-write all the UF notebooks called ProgL repo functions #62 does not mean to rerun tutorials using paper parameters, as it was created before we had any tutorials. I believe it means to recreate the UF notebooks used to generate the UF paper figures with ProgLearn functions in place of the UF functions. Hence, my suggestion that you comment your tasking on that issue and close this one - as this task seems to be under that umbrella of recreating UF figures by substituting ProgLearn functions.

[bstraus1]

I can do that, but wouldn’t it be better practice to link these issues since this is one I can fully complete while the other is a much larger umbrella issue?

[levinwil]

I personally think it would be best to mark this issue as a duplicate, mention that you are closing it because it falls under #62, and then comment a checklist of tasks you'd like to complete related to this issue that fall under the umbrella of #62

Just my opinion. Ideally, we'd have everything related to #62 on the thread under #62

[bstraus1]

That makes sense. I'll do that now.