Removes pybamm events by default, moves infeasible_solutions API to problem class

[BradyPlanden]

Description

This PR does the following:

• Clears the pybamm model events on BaseModel.build(). These events are stored as a class attribute and can be reapplied at a later time via the setter method apply_events
• Removes the allow_infeasible_solutions optimiser argument, which is replaced with infeasible_solutions at the BaseProblem level. This steps towards containing the infeasible_solution logic within the model and problem classes.
• Updates model.predict to avoid modifying the model attributes when passing to pybamm's simulation class.
• Bugfix Nox quick session to align with global nox reuse venv flag.
• Applies physical_viability boolean attribute for checking parameter viability within OptimisationResult

Issue reference

Fixes #664

Review

Before you mark your PR as ready for review, please ensure that you've considered the following:

• Updated the CHANGELOG.md in reverse chronological order (newest at the top) with a concise description of the changes, including the PR number.
• Noted any breaking changes, including details on how it might impact existing functionality.

Type of change

• New Feature: A non-breaking change that adds new functionality.
• Optimization: A code change that improves performance.
• Examples: A change to existing or additional examples.
• Bug Fix: A non-breaking change that addresses an issue.
• Documentation: Updates to documentation or new documentation for new features.
• Refactoring: Non-functional changes that improve the codebase.
• Style: Non-functional changes related to code style (formatting, naming, etc).
• Testing: Additional tests to improve coverage or confirm functionality.
• Other: (Insert description of change)

Key checklist:

• No style issues: $ pre-commit run (or $ nox -s pre-commit) (see CONTRIBUTING.md for how to set this up to run automatically when committing locally, in just two lines of code)
• All unit tests pass: $ nox -s tests
• The documentation builds: $ nox -s doctest

You can run integration tests, unit tests, and doctests together at once, using $ nox -s quick.

Further checks:

• Code is well-commented, especially in complex or unclear areas.
• Added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works.
• Checked that coverage remains or improves, and added tests if necessary to maintain or increase coverage.

Thank you for contributing to our project! Your efforts help us to deliver great software.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 99.15%. Comparing base (828a8e3) to head (0c83f42).
Report is 4 commits behind head on develop.

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop     #672      +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage    99.27%   99.15%   -0.13%     
===========================================
  Files           64       66       +2     
  Lines         4813     4838      +25     
===========================================
+ Hits          4778     4797      +19     
- Misses          35       41       +6     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[BradyPlanden]

This should now be ready for a review; however, there are a few things worth noting:

1. At the moment, I have left the ability to reapply events and proceed with optimisation/sampling. We could simplify the codebase quite a bit if we only supported this as a check on the final identified parameters; however, I'm not yet sure what types of edge-cases we will experience for various user-defined models. A depreciation notice seems like the best way forward, with a few releases this is removed from the codebase.
2. During the implementation of Add PyBaMM model to OptimisationResult & PosteriorSummary #631 we will need to decide on when to reapply the events and how to convey that information to the user.
3. There is a bit of statefulness with this change, as shown with the early failing model_build unit test. It's not clear if this has exposed a problem with our build implementation and model clearing, or if its' from these additions. Given the problem class copies the model on construction, I don't expect users' will see this issue; however, we could improve our build and clear methods to improve this.