-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 16
Remove squeeze factor logic from HealthSystem #1662
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
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
… since we removal squeeze factors
|
Three healthsystem tests failing:
The tests 2 & 3 look safe to remove. They're using the capabilities_coefficient to scale capabilities down to 0, leading to high squeeze factor, and therefore testing squeeze factors indirectly. They're both testing mode 1, so I think both these tests can be removed because we won't have squeeze factors for mode 1. However the first test, (FAO @marghe-molaro) |
|
Hi @tamuri,
TLOmodel/src/tlo/methods/healthsystem.py Lines 2068 to 2073 in c616315
Given that squeeze_factor == float('inf') is equivalent to saying that one of the required officers is missing, all we want to do is replace line 2072 with something like "if in mode 1 and one of the required officers has capabilities=0, ok_to_run = False". By doing this, we no longer rely on squeeze as proxy and hence test_which_hsi_can_run could be kept as is.
Please let me know if anything is unclear, happy to discuss over a call if easier.
|
|
Thanks! I think I understand. Perhaps we do some pair programming to box this off. Feels like it should be fairly straightforward. |
|
Hi @tamuri, just checking the best way to go about this - should I work on the tamuri/1661-remove-squeeze-factors branch directly, branch-off it, or create a completely new branch from master? And reminding us of things I need to add:
|
|
Thanks, Margherita. If this branch helps at all, feel free to continue on it. However works best for you. |
|
Hi @tamuri, Above issues now addressed in #1689. A few additional comments:
|

Towards completing #1661