Ordered simplex constraint transform

[spinkney]

What you’ve said above seems to contradict what you said awhile ago (and I don’t mean to grill you! just want to make sure I understand)

Ordered Simplex

Why wouldn’t this work? It’s identified through the prior. Of course, the prior will matter here for fitting. A simpler alternative parameters { positive_ordered[K] pi_raw; ... transformed parameters { ordered[K] pi = softmax(pi_raw); won’t work because the pi_raw parameters won’t be identified. And you can’t just add a zero value to identify if you want to preserve orderedness. You can’t just put a prior on pi here without including the log Jacobian of the softmax transform, eithe…

Just curious if there’s something that’s changed your mind about this?

On another note, I made the positive_ordered thing negative because it allows big simplexes. If I keep it positive I get log(0) errors with > 30 sized simplexes.