Skip to content

Avoid the Gaussian-only road #535

Open
@Affie

Description

@Affie

i think we should solve @GearsAD ‘s concerns regarding softtype on CG first before we close this? I’m happy with name only if it solves the right problem. I’m worried about the CG stuff going down a Gaussian-only road and end up forcing the overall DFG side to a crisp but overly restrictive DataLevel1 space. I mean that users just want Level1 and moan it’s not working well enough, and somehow get out of using Level2. To help avoid all that i think softtypename::Symbol/String is good.

Just to reiterate, i originally wanted to avoid duplication of the whole softtype so just guessed name as a string as cheap hack. Without the necessary type information for non-Julia use cases, i’m not sure... Again the question for me is what do we want from Summary (what is the one sentence existence proof for Summary/Level1?).

Is it fair for a user to avoid the Julia internals just to get the inference product in a usable way, or should they at least don some of the Julia-ness to use the inference products? Perhaps i should add, (again) that we are not building Gaussian-only, so the user should get the full beliefs, not just hide behind PPE. That means DataLevel2. I don’t want to dumb down the output and look shoddy against a more mature Gaussian-only system. I’d rather force the user into Julia or build a better multilang interface (I vote the latter).

I know Neo4j has a bunch of nice features for Gaussian-only, but that should be “supportive” not “authoritative” in the design.

I would argue Summary/Level1 CANNOT be it is the final inference product. The final inference product is and always should be DataLevel2.

TL;DR I fairly strongly feel softtypename as Symbol/String or remove completely from Level1. If there are cool features in Neo4j we can leverage, then leave that door open; but the DB should not dictate our design too much but rather store what is needed — pattern here is strongly non-Gaussian (ie not just PPE).

Originally posted by @dehann in #237 (comment)

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions