-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 110
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Handling of auto-scaled controls in forward models #8814
Comments
For more contextual information, from (@verveerpj): Issue The scaled controls are passed to the forward models without re-scaling, i.e., the remain in the [0, 1] scale (or whatever target scale was specified). Currently, the forward models expect this range, and do a rescaling operation themselves. To be able to these, the forward models must be configured with the original scale. Currently, this means that the minimum and maximum values specified in the Everest configuration must be duplicated in some forward model configuration files. Proposal Effort and risks -The changes in Everest are minor.
Some thought would need to go into how to handle the backward compatibility and risks, some options are:
|
This is related to a newer issue that would resolve this with a broader solution: #9537 |
Issue
The
auto_scale
keyword allows the user to specify controls in their usual physical units, and scaling is then handled by the optimizer. However, the scaled controls are passed to the forward models without back-scaling. The forward models must be configured with the minimum and maximum values from the Everest configuration and rescale the controls themselves. This duplication, with the associated risk of errors, could be avoided if Everest scales the controls back to their original range before transferring the values to the forward model.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: