Skip to content

Conversation

@jialinding
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@jialinding jialinding requested a review from edgan8 August 28, 2017 20:36
@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage remained the same at 94.032% when pulling 6c5d6e4 on bounds into aa5e837 on master.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage remained the same at 94.032% when pulling 853c86c on bounds into aa5e837 on master.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage remained the same at 94.032% when pulling 8657063 on bounds into aa5e837 on master.

Copy link
Contributor

@edgan8 edgan8 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good work implementing these. It's really easy to have bugs in this kind of detailed mathematical code though, can you add a test that checks that these are valid lower bounds on a variety of distributions? Right now it seems like you just check that the estimates are "close enough", and only on one distribution.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants