Uncertainty-and-the-Saving-Rate heavily uses cstwMPC

[MridulS]

Should we just pin this demark to work with 0.10.6 or try to make it work by import the REMARK?

[llorracc]

I'd like to try to make it work. I think it is one of the most useful of the DemARKs.

[sbenthall]

See econ-ark/HARK#667

Part of making this work is:

• Use the Lorenz curve functionality from HARK
• use the SCF dataset from HARK

[sbenthall]

Based on: econ-ark/HARK#669 (comment)

it sounds like another step to making this work is:

• use the ConsAggShockModel and CobbDouglas economy, or other HARK base classes, instead of cstwMPC code

[sbenthall]

I'm taking a crack at this. However, Mridul's assessment that this notebook "depends heavily" on the old cstwMPC code is right.

https://github.com/econ-ark/DemARK/blob/0.10.5/notebooks/Uncertainty-and-the-Saving-Rate.ipynb

The DemARK is not well documented enough for me to understand what is important to keep.
I am getting some contradictory signals....

In this comment, @mnwhite is saying that the modifications to the CobbDouglas economy are just what's needed for the cstwMPC results:
econ-ark/HARK#669 (comment)

In the DemARK, the market class modifications distributeParams, findLorenzDistanceAtTargetKY, and getKYratioDifference are being used to set parameters for plots and things.

I am not sure what's going on here, but from the looks of it Uncertainy-and-the-Savings-Rate replicates more of the original cstwMPC paper results than was originally supposed?

It looks like this DemARK was added 15 months ago by @llorracc . Perhaps it is a fork of some earlier cstwMPC code.

I wonder if it is possible to explain what is essential, and what is inessential, for this DemARK.

Another complication: this DemARK appears to depend on some control flow logic which is rather mysteriously in the cstwMPCSetupParams file. There was a lot more in that file than just the SCF datasets. I've been copying the relevant parameters into the notebook....

https://github.com/econ-ark/HARK/blob/0.10.5/HARK/cstwMPC/SetupParamsCSTW.py

But to be honest, I think the best thing to do would be for this DemARK to be rewritten by somebody who understood the importance of the content.

I'll push my WIP PR momentarily

[mnwhite]

I honestly have no idea what this notebook is; I'm really sorry.

…

On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 10:43 AM Sebastian Benthall < ***@***.***> wrote: I'm taking a crack at this. However, Mridul's assessment that this notebook "depends heavily" on the old cstwMPC code is right. https://github.com/econ-ark/DemARK/blob/0.10.5/notebooks/Uncertainty-and-the-Saving-Rate.ipynb The DemARK is not well documented enough for me to understand what is important to keep. I am getting some contradictory signals.... In this comment, @mnwhite <https://github.com/mnwhite> is saying that the modifications to the CobbDouglas economy are just what's needed for the cstwMPC results: econ-ark/HARK#669 (comment) <econ-ark/HARK#669 (comment)> In the DemARK, the market class modifications distributeParams, findLorenzDistanceAtTargetKY, and getKYratioDifference are being used to set parameters for plots and things. I am not sure what's going on here, but from the looks of it Uncertainy-and-the-Savings-Rate replicates more of the original cstwMPC paper results than was originally supposed? It looks like this DemARK was added 15 months ago by @llorracc <https://github.com/llorracc> . Perhaps it is a fork of some earlier cstwMPC code. I wonder if it is possible to explain what is essential, and what is inessential, for this DemARK. Another complication: this DemARK appears to depend on some control flow logic which is rather mysteriously in the cstwMPCSetupParams file. There was a lot more in that file than just the SCF datasets. I've been copying the relevant parameters into the notebook.... https://github.com/econ-ark/HARK/blob/0.10.5/HARK/cstwMPC/SetupParamsCSTW.py But to be honest, I think the best thing to do would be for this DemARK to be rewritten by somebody who understood the importance of the content. I'll push my WIP PR momentarily — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#119 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADKRAFMA3VX7V5QOHAXET3DRRFN77ANCNFSM4MPNJUTA> .

[sbenthall]

Ok, @mnwhite that makes sense.
@llorracc maybe we should work together on restoring this notebook.

[llorracc]

Yes, I'll work with you to restore it. It's a pretty important one. Let's discuss on Thu.

…

On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 11:15 AM Sebastian Benthall < ***@***.***> wrote: Ok, @mnwhite <https://github.com/mnwhite> that makes sense. @llorracc <https://github.com/llorracc> maybe we should work together on restoring this notebook. — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#119 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAKCK72S2MYNU6KMBYXRFPLRRFRXXANCNFSM4MPNJUTA> .

-- - Chris Carroll