Skip to content
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

Control parameters to reproduce ergm 3.11 (last in the 3.* series) estimation settings #592

Open
krivit opened this issue Dec 22, 2024 · 1 comment

Comments

@krivit
Copy link
Member

krivit commented Dec 22, 2024

This is a frequently requested feature, so I am opening a ticket here for how to provide this functionality.

My current idea is to implement a control.ergm3() function that simply passes its arguments to control.ergm() but whose defaults set up the estimation along the lines of 3.11. I've created a new branch, control3, that implements, documents, and tests such a function. Thanks to some R function definition alchemy, it should automatically track the unaffected parameters and implementation of control.ergm().

As of this writing, the two affected settings are:

  • MCMLE.termination = "Hummel": Use Hummel (2012) termination criterion instead of confidence.
  • MCMLE.effectiveSize = NULL: Disable adaptive MCMC.

@sgoodreau , @smjenness , @mbojan , @CarterButts , since you and your teams are some of the most frequent encounterers (an actual word) of situations in which problems that converged on 3.* no longer do no 4.*, can you please,

  • Test if this works for you?
  • Suggest any other settings that need to be adjusted?
@krivit krivit self-assigned this Dec 22, 2024
krivit added a commit that referenced this issue Dec 22, 2024
…chemy) from control.ergm() all parameters and contents except for those explicitly modified.

references #592
@sgoodreau
Copy link
Contributor

Thank you! I will reach out to Aditya, since it was his example that I started down this road for. I'll point him to this and see if he can do some testing.

@smjenness - when I was helping you to diagnose your edges+offset(isolates) model, there was a zone of network stats that I could get to converge in 3.x but not in 4.x. We subsequently discovered that the model itself is a bit of a challenge, but even then this should provide a useful test case. I will work on this one.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants