You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
It can be useful to test the effect of uniform constraint terms when debugging fits. What is the pyhf way to do this? When converting a workspace from xml (with pyhf 0.4.1) with this measurement
the ConstraintTerm is not picked up, even though it should act on the systematics with name ttb_Rad. I am not sure whether this is within or beyond HistFactory scope.
Relevant Issues and Pull Requests
none that I am aware of
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
We don't support both (a) uniform constraint terms; (b) having configurable constraint types.
It's not technically impossible to implement it in pyhf, but I need to think about the use-case. In this example, are you constraining the parameter ttb_Rad to only be [-1,1] when it's normally an unconstrained normalization factor? How does this differ from changing the bounds on that parameter in this case?
The parameter ttb_Rad in this example controls a HistoSys and OverallSys term, and would usually come with a Gaussian constraint term. It is not a NormFactor. I am looking for a way to remove that constraint term, and one way of doing this in ROOT is as shown in that snippet above (there might be other ways to achieve the same).
Question
It can be useful to test the effect of uniform constraint terms when debugging fits. What is the
pyhf
way to do this? When converting a workspace from xml (withpyhf 0.4.1
) with this measurementthe
ConstraintTerm
is not picked up, even though it should act on the systematics with namettb_Rad
. I am not sure whether this is within or beyond HistFactory scope.Relevant Issues and Pull Requests
none that I am aware of
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: