-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 42
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
Questions after beat update #90
Comments
Looking at your config_ffi I would say your SMC sampler configuration is not ensuring convergence of the sampler. You have too little nchains and nsteps in order to make convergence of the sampling likely. Remember you are sampling in this step ~200 parameters. For that 500 chains and 100 steps is way too little! I would say you need at least 3k and 300, respectively. Better even more. The updates did not include any changes in the inference architecture. |
Dear @hvasbath , Then, I set rake to "rake: -114.58259929068664" according to example 4 and got the same correct slip distribution as in example 4. Therefore, I guess the rake = -82.96 calculated in Example 3 may not be correct. My question is: |
That explains it. If your geometry estimation results at the rake of -82 this will be the reference rake to which the static slip estimation is rotated, then allowing only variation in rake according to your uperp prior bound. |
Thank you for your patient reply, I will continue to learn the beat. |
Dear @hvasbath ,
![1111](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/91539014/136563089-444d1315-197c-4b97-ab64-2adfddf4996c.png)
I 'm sorry to disturb you with this question. I redid example 3 and example 4 and I noticed that rake is not the same as before, did I do something wrong?
config_geometry.txt
config_ffi.txt
BEAT_log.txt
Thank you very much
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: