eb8680

I don't think `*Meta.__call__` methods are the right place for this kind of simplification logic (these methods should do nothing except fill default values for optional arguments and possibly call...

> Should I add such a test? Yes, that would be very helpful!

Another interesting paper on a similar theme: http://papers.nips.cc/paper/8041-graphical-model-inference-sequential-monte-carlo-meets-deterministic-approximations

I don't think it would replace the basic Python operator overloads, but array-specific methods like sum() could probably be removed in favor of these generic methods.

As discussed on Friday, you can already achieve something like this with `funsor.terms.Lambda`: ```py ops.mean(Lambda("b", Lambda("a", x)), dims=(0, 1)) ``` Clearly this pattern could be generalized into something like `Apply`....

@ordabayevy I copied the work plan from #398 to this issue. I suggest going ahead with making `modified_partial_sum_product` use the first-class Funsor `funsor.sum_product.MarkovProduct` in place of `sequential_sum_product` and testing that...

> Can you point to an example that tests compatibility with funsor.optimizer.apply_optimizer? See my PR #400 - that should address this point.

@ordabayevy any idea what might be happening?

Hi @h1psta, thanks for the feature request. Do you have a specific use case in mind that you could explain to give some context? Are you interested in contributing some...

> I will be happy to contribute at some point but I am still getting to know the ins and outs of the package! Sounds great! We're here to help,...