Skip to content
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

standardize decision variables in locate #326

Open
jGaboardi opened this issue Dec 27, 2022 · 3 comments
Open

standardize decision variables in locate #326

jGaboardi opened this issue Dec 27, 2022 · 3 comments
Assignees

Comments

@jGaboardi
Copy link
Member

jGaboardi commented Dec 27, 2022

Currently, we have a mishmash of decision variable notation within the locate models that are based on the original models' formulations, adaptation of such, or something. We should standardize them for one unified set.

  • $X =$ demand/client locations
  • $Y =$ service/facility locations

xref #295

@jGaboardi
Copy link
Member Author

@gegen07 @ljwolf

Do either of you have any strong opinions about this?

@gegen07
Copy link
Member

gegen07 commented Jan 14, 2024

I'm fine with it. Should we assign the names in the builder process instead of passing the name as an argument?

@jGaboardi
Copy link
Member Author

Should we assign the names in the builder process instead of passing the name as an argument?

This is a good point... I was halfway thinking we should keep the variable names as default keyword values, but then I realized that we don't even allow users to pass in different names now.

Can we think any of reason not to move the variable names to within the builder methods, like you suggest?

In terms of action plan, we need to figure out if #295 is still a problem.

Also, we will need to update:

  • docstrings
    • check formulations
    • check language in Parameters and Returns sections, etc,
  • notebooks
    • check formulations
    • check naming of decision variable labels

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants