From @betanalpha on April 29, 2015 14:6

There’s no computational benefit to having inputs on the log scale for the CDFs as they’re typically given by transcendental functions and not amenable to the analytic simplifications the PDFs are.

From @bob-carpenter on April 29, 2015 14:18

Even if there's no computational benefit, it's conceptually cleaner to have them match, and it also allows people to write truncated models, as in:

  y ~ poisson_log(alpha) T[3,];

So even a simple implementation in terms of just exp() transforming the alpha argument would be worth adding for convenience.

Question: in the stan manual at E.6 it says we're moving from say, poisson_cdf_log to poisson_lcdf etc.

It seems like this happened in the stan language as of 2.10 but not at all in the math library. Advice on how to proceed?

This already has a ticket: #320

The library should continue with the _log convention, then
we'll change them all in one big pull request. The code
generator isn't set up to understand built in _lpdfs yet.

• Bob

On Oct 12, 2016, at 3:46 PM, thelseraphim notifications@github.com wrote:

Question: in the stan manual at E.6 it says we're moving from say, poisson_cdf_log to poisson_lcdf etc.

It seems like this happened in the stan language as of 2.10 but not at all in the math library. Advice on how to proceed?

—
You are receiving this because you were assigned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.