Reject invalid numeric PMF/prior vectors#145
Merged
Merged
Conversation
…irichlet() Co-authored-by: sbfnk <sebastian.funk@lshtm.ac.uk>
sbfnk
approved these changes
Jul 23, 2026
sbfnk
marked this pull request as ready for review
July 23, 2026 06:14
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Addresses #141.
A shared internal
check_pmf_values()rejects a numeric PMF/weight vector that is non-numeric, contains negative or non-finite values, or is all zero, with an informative error. Wired intoNonParametric()andDirichlet(prior = )so both behave the same. Un-normalised non-negative weights are still accepted and normalised as before.This is the safe, non-breaking slice of #141: it catches genuinely-invalid input without touching the auto-normalisation behaviour. The broader question in #141 — whether to keep silently renormalising, warn near 1, or preserve a deliberately sub-1 PMF (e.g. a nowcasting sub-distribution) — is left open on the issue for a separate decision, so I've referenced rather than closed it.