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

Integrate/incorporate https://github.com/STOR-i/Changepoints.jl #30

Closed
Datseris opened this issue Mar 16, 2023 · 5 comments
Closed

Integrate/incorporate https://github.com/STOR-i/Changepoints.jl #30

Datseris opened this issue Mar 16, 2023 · 5 comments
Labels
design Library wide design discussion enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@Datseris
Copy link
Member

opening this quickly before I forget, and will write more later. Software with similar goals exists and we have to think how to integrate or incorporate to not duplicate effort or content: https://github.com/STOR-i/Changepoints.jl

@Datseris Datseris added enhancement New feature or request design Library wide design discussion labels Mar 16, 2023
@JanJereczek
Copy link
Contributor

As far as I can see, Changepoints.jl recognizes the changepoint when it occurs and not before. Therefore it would be a very valuable tool to recognize changepoints in e.g. complexity measures.

I propose we implement indicators that would show such jumps and then consider using Changepoints.jl within TransitionIndicators.jl to recognize them.

@Datseris
Copy link
Member Author

If we use exactly our framework, as it is now, and then use as the indicator metric eg. complexity entropy, and as the change metric e.g., any distribution distance function, we also find change points where it occurs. It is just a matter of what is the indicator and what is the change metric. ChangePoints.jl however uses a compelte different algorithm to find a change point. We use significance testing via surrogates to find a change point. They use optimizing a cost function.

@Datseris
Copy link
Member Author

So the question is, how to unite these two compeltely different approaches under a common API.

@Datseris
Copy link
Member Author

Closing in favor of #52

@Datseris
Copy link
Member Author

And we have solved it: we now have a way to unite these completely different approaches under a common API.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
design Library wide design discussion enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants