fverac

Do we want to restructure/relabel some of our docs now to include a panel section? I believe at the moment we currently have a "Dynamic Treatment Regime" section, but maybe...

> Do we want to restructure/relabel some of our docs now to include a panel section? > > I believe at the moment we currently have a "Dynamic Treatment Regime"...

Thanks all for your feedback. We currently have a PR in progress to enable missing values for W. Enabling missing values in X is less clear, see message from a...

This definitely seems to be a bug. It seems we are indexing arrays in a way that is compatible with numpy but not compatible with pandas. I think for now...

Thanks for raising this issue. In the original PR we originally only considered missing data during training, but it seems there is interest in extending this to inferencing as well.

Thanks for your feedback and suggested solutions. I feel the warning is still valuable even when T0 and T1 are left as default, but for your case would the warning...

This is late follow-up, but I spent some time digging into this and can offer a solution. Hopefully this might help others who run into this. The crux of the...

> @fverac I tried you solution, but it does not work Hm, what exactly doesn't work? I just reconfirmed that the sample code I provided still works for me.

> Anyone working on this? I'm thinking of taking it. Since no one has spoken up, I think you should be free to take this on

> I believe the issue is with the _BaseDRIVModelFinal class. For example, I can replicate the shape inconsistency with SparseLinearDRIV too. > > I avoid the shape inconsistency issue, if...