4 ms·

It's for differential equations. Getting uncertainty without parameter sampling saves a lot of computational time and really opens up the problems that can be s

It's for differential equations. Getting uncertainty without parameter sampling saves a lot of computational time and really opens up the problems that can be solved.

mlthoughts2018 8y ago
But why does “getting uncertainty without parameter sampling” have anything to do with parametric numeric types? The latter is just a possible manner of implementation (that I’d argue is too cutesy), but there are many other ways to design a system like that, for example like fused types in Cython combined with numba class jitting. I still see no reason to believe that something that parametrizes differential equation functions or linalg functions over “uncertainty primitives” would be anything but a functional programming hot take on something that could be more straightforwardly done many other ways not relying on parametric abstraction.
- ChrisRackauckas 8y ago
  The Julia solution didn't require anyone to actually think about making it work, and it works well (we found out from a Discourse post that it works, the developers didn't even know :)), and now we are using it in our research codes because it is a great way to speedup what was traditionally done via parameter sampling. Until I see someone else take an existing ODE solver like LSODA and convert it into something that can output uncertainties without having to do parameter sampling, I won't think other ecosystems are very close to what we have already done. Places like SciPy are still calling out to Fortran routines from ODEPACK for this, so making it work with Numba class jitting is a long way away. Show how easy it is to code it by showing code. Ours is already done: the ball is in your court.
  - mlthoughts2018 8y ago
    I just looked up your paper with Nie and indeed you’re just using a particular set of patterns with multiple dispatch and metaprogramming. Nothing is fundamentally different than other ways of implementing the same thing that don’t rely on parametric abstraction. You seem not to know about numba and Cython given that you responded with a comment about scipy using FORTRAN, which is not relevant. You can do the exact same multiple dispatch patterns with Cython fused types, and with several dispatch techniques in numba. Look, I’m glad people like your library. It doesn’t change the larger points about this type of design pattern being premature abstraction.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]

It's for differential equations. Getting uncertainty without parameter sampling saves a lot of computational time and really opens up the problems that can be solved.

mlthoughts2018 8y ago

But why does “getting uncertainty without parameter sampling” have anything to do with parametric numeric types? The latter is just a possible manner of implementation (that I’d argue is too cutesy), but there are many other ways to design a system like that, for example like fused types in Cython combined with numba class jitting. I still see no reason to believe that something that parametrizes differential equation functions or linalg functions over “uncertainty primitives” would be anything but a functional programming hot take on something that could be more straightforwardly done many other ways not relying on parametric abstraction.

ChrisRackauckas 8y ago
The Julia solution didn't require anyone to actually think about making it work, and it works well (we found out from a Discourse post that it works, the developers didn't even know :)), and now we are using it in our research codes because it is a great way to speedup what was traditionally done via parameter sampling. Until I see someone else take an existing ODE solver like LSODA and convert it into something that can output uncertainties without having to do parameter sampling, I won't think other ecosystems are very close to what we have already done. Places like SciPy are still calling out to Fortran routines from ODEPACK for this, so making it work with Numba class jitting is a long way away. Show how easy it is to code it by showing code. Ours is already done: the ball is in your court.
- mlthoughts2018 8y ago
  I just looked up your paper with Nie and indeed you’re just using a particular set of patterns with multiple dispatch and metaprogramming. Nothing is fundamentally different than other ways of implementing the same thing that don’t rely on parametric abstraction. You seem not to know about numba and Cython given that you responded with a comment about scipy using FORTRAN, which is not relevant. You can do the exact same multiple dispatch patterns with Cython fused types, and with several dispatch techniques in numba. Look, I’m glad people like your library. It doesn’t change the larger points about this type of design pattern being premature abstraction.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]