-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2
Contributor Provided Score Thresholds and Calibrations #361
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
Contributor Provided Score Thresholds and Calibrations #361
Conversation
jstone-dev
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should we somehow document or validate the expected calibration keys?
Apart from this, no comments except for the one typo.
|
|
||
| if len(set((num_es, num_st, num_plr))) != 1: | ||
| raise ValidationError( | ||
| "Calibration object must provide the same number of evidence strenghts, score thresholds, and positive likelihood ratios. " |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Spelling typo
efcca99 to
000819a
Compare
@jstone-dev Are you talking about calibration keys in the sense of For the former, I guess I just don't know what those will be at the moment but it does probably make sense to have a list of them which are valid-- especially before we open up an endpoint for contributors to add calibrations (if that ever happens). For the latter, I think the pydantic model validation should be sufficient for API users at least, although we should certainly work on improving our documentation in the upcoming months. |
000819a to
740f8aa
Compare
No description provided.