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

982 Make NPI delay implementation a parameter, set it and harmonize model advance functions #984

Merged
merged 14 commits into from
Sep 16, 2024

Conversation

mknaranja
Copy link
Member

@mknaranja mknaranja commented Apr 2, 2024

Changes and Information

Please briefly list the changes (main added features, changed items, or corrected bugs) made:

  • Rename delay_lockdown and make it a DynamicNPIsImplementationDelay Parameter
  • Harmonize SECIR and SECIRVVS advance functions

If need be, add additional information and what the reviewer should look out for in particular:

Merge Request - Guideline Checklist

Please check our git workflow. Use the draft feature if the Pull Request is not yet ready to review.

Checks by code author

  • Every addressed issue is linked (use the "Closes #ISSUE" keyword below)
  • New code adheres to coding guidelines
  • No large data files have been added (files should in sum not exceed 100 KB, avoid PDFs, Word docs, etc.)
  • Tests are added for new functionality and a local test run was successful (with and without OpenMP)
  • Appropriate documentation for new functionality has been added (Doxygen in the code and Markdown files if necessary)
  • Proper attention to licenses, especially no new third-party software with conflicting license has been added
  • (For ABM development) Checked benchmark results and ran and posted a local test above from before and after development to ensure performance is monitored.

Checks by code reviewer(s)

  • Corresponding issue(s) is/are linked and addressed
  • Code is clean of development artifacts (no deactivated or commented code lines, no debugging printouts, etc.)
  • Appropriate unit tests have been added, CI passes, code coverage and performance is acceptable (did not decrease)
  • No large data files added in the whole history of commits(files should in sum not exceed 100 KB, avoid PDFs, Word docs, etc.)
  • On merge, add 2-5 lines with the changes (main added features, changed items, or corrected bugs) to the merge-commit-message. This can be taken from the briefly-list-the-changes above (best case) or the separate commit messages (worst case).

@mknaranja mknaranja requested review from HenrZu and jubicker April 2, 2024 13:49
@mknaranja mknaranja linked an issue Apr 2, 2024 that may be closed by this pull request
@mknaranja mknaranja changed the title Make NPI delay implementation a parameter, set it and harmonize model advance functions 982 Make NPI delay implementation a parameter, set it and harmonize model advance functions Apr 2, 2024
@mknaranja
Copy link
Member Author

@HenrZu @jubicker After I had reseen our delay_lockdown parameter on Thursday I directly made a first suggestion on how to improve it. There might be things missing like sampling, setting etc and tests are missing anyway. Could you have a look and take over?

Copy link

codecov bot commented Jun 12, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 99.50980% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 96.47%. Comparing base (d4ed967) to head (5fcbb7e).
Report is 4 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
cpp/models/ode_secir/model.h 96.29% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #984      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   96.44%   96.47%   +0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         135      135              
  Lines       11286    11369      +83     
==========================================
+ Hits        10885    10968      +83     
  Misses        401      401              

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

@HenrZu
Copy link
Contributor

HenrZu commented Jun 26, 2024

@mknaranja @jubicker i have made some changes and added a few tests. Maybe one can verify/ review this further.

cpp/tests/test_dynamic_npis.cpp Show resolved Hide resolved
cpp/tests/test_dynamic_npis.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
cpp/models/ode_secirvvs/model.h Show resolved Hide resolved
cpp/tests/test_dynamic_npis.cpp Show resolved Hide resolved
@jubicker
Copy link
Member

jubicker commented Jul 9, 2024

@mknaranja @jubicker i have made some changes and added a few tests. Maybe one can verify/ review this further.

Looks good so far (only had some minor comments). But the merge conflicts should be resolved.

@HenrZu HenrZu requested a review from jubicker August 28, 2024 10:20
@HenrZu HenrZu merged commit 07fcfa2 into main Sep 16, 2024
58 checks passed
@HenrZu HenrZu deleted the 982-add-dynamicnpi-implementation-delay-as-parameter branch September 16, 2024 07:41
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.

Add DynamicNPI implementation delay as parameter.
3 participants