Add nonfiler income calibration targets#994
Draft
MaxGhenis wants to merge 1 commit into
Draft
Conversation
d4d84de to
41faed8
Compare
41faed8 to
5c24de0
Compare
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
taxable_interest_income+dividend_incomecan stay linear in survey weights00200) asirs_employment_incomeand tests for the new target extraction/matrix filtering behaviorLocal Evaluation
Used
policyengine-us==1.691.13with the public calibrationstratified_extended_cps.h5and published calibration DB as the base. Private source impute/PUF clone was skipped because the raw private inputs were not locally available.New-target local fit:
Old-target control fit under the same settings:
Selected old -> new aggregate estimates:
Baseline SPM under the local weights:
Interpretation: the new targets are included and build locally, but this default full-target local fit barely moves the aggregates. The next calibration improvement is likely target weighting/grouping rather than only adding rows.
Tests
uv run --frozen --with policyengine-us==1.691.13 pytest policyengine_us_data/tests/test_etl_national_targets.py policyengine_us_data/tests/test_calibration/test_unified_matrix_builder_constrained_values.py -quv run --frozen --with policyengine-us==1.691.13 python -m py_compile policyengine_us_data/db/etl_national_targets.py policyengine_us_data/utils/loss.py policyengine_us_data/calibration/unified_matrix_builder.py policyengine_us_data/db/validate_database.py policyengine_us_data/utils/target_variables.pygit diff --check