Skip start of optimization until the first measurable or adjustable #505
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
… are exactly consistent from run to run
…gives more consistent results if the inputs are re-ordered
This runs the model once, then creates a copy of the parset which is initialized to the `skip_start` year. Then the optimization only needs to run from that year. This works when we only have SpendingAdjustments and any Measurable coded in optimization.py
Test that skipping until the first adjustable or measurable gives the exact same solution as when we don't skip
…s if you run a parset, then initialize it halfway from those results, running from the halfway timestep gives the same results
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Possibly could skip until the first adjustment, as the measurables will all be the same before any adjustable changes anything?
Haven't yet checked for:
Might revert 8b79080 as discussed in #504
Feel free to re-factor @RomeshA