printing more details about why parameters are at a boundary

[andreh7]

• split method utils::isParameterAtBoundary(..) into two methods utils::isParameterAtLowerBoundary(..) and utils::isParameterAtUpperBoundary(..)
• method utils::anyParameterAtBoundaries(..) now prints more details about why a parameter is at a boundary

This has been useful to identify issues where the uncertainty of a parameter became quite big (and thus the parameter was seen to be close to both boundaries).

Example output:

[WARNING] Found [paramXYZ] at both boundaries (value: 3.593620 +8.407840-8.407840 range: -4.472136..4.472136).

[gpetruc]

@adavidzh since you wrote the original boundary checking, can you check this PR and if it's ok merge it?
Thanks

[adavidzh]

This is bugged: should be atUpperBoundary = isParameterAtUpperBoundary.

[andreh7]

On 06/07/15 04:06, André David wrote:

In src/utils.cc
#197 (comment):

@@ -740,14 +757,31 @@ bool utils::anyParameterAtBoundaries( const RooArgSet &params, int verbosity ){

 RooLinkedListIter iter = params.iterator(); int i = 0;
 for (RooRealVar *a = (RooRealVar *) iter.Next(); a != 0; a = (RooRealVar *) iter.Next(), ++i) {

•    bool isBad = isParameterAtBoundary(*a);
  

•    bool atLowerBoundary = isParameterAtLowerBoundary(*a);
  

•    bool atUpperBoundary = isParameterAtLowerBoundary(*a);
  

This is bugged: should be atUpperBoundary = isParameterAtUpperBoundary.

ah.. thanks for spotting this (it didn't reveal itself in my test case
where the parameter
is close to both boundaries). I'll update this.

[andreypz]

This would be indeed useful.
Could someone merge it into latest code?

[nucleosynthesis]

Although this is quite an old PR, since it merges into 102x, I have pushed it to a PR #550 and will close this one.