Kristian Agasøster Haaga

Hey, @rusandris! Thanks for bringing this up. Your suggestion makes perfect sense. There is no reason that the transfer operator should operate on binned outcome spaces only. The reason I...

Currently, estimation keywords to `TransferOperator` for the binning approach is stored in the `TransferOperator` struct. I guess we can just make dedicated `TransferOperatorBinningKeywords` (with a much better name) struct, or...

> For enough samples, probabilities(est::TransferOperator, o::OutcomeSpace, x) should then be roughly equivalent to probabilities(est::TransferOperator, o::OutcomeSpace, x) Yes, it should be `probabilities(est::TransferOperator{ValueBinning}, o::OutcomeSpace, x)` roughly equivalent to `probabilities(est::RelativeAmount, o::ValueBinning, x)`, with...

> Yes. We first use codify and then pass the "symbols timeseries" into the "actual" transfer operator estimation. This also links to #420, where I also want the outcomes explicitly....

> As always with ComplexityMeasures.jl the situation is more complex than I thought :D and it doesn't have a simple clean straightforward solution... Haha! We can always create a SimpleMeasures.jl...

> If you are both participating in the JuliaDynamics meetings then we can discuss this there. You can add it to the agenda @kahaaga @rusandris . I think I'll make...

Another thing to think about: should there be an equivalent to `allprobabilities` (i.e. all outcomes are always included during estimation) for `transferoperator` (perhaps just keyword argument), so that we can...

> Agreed. Two separate methods is the way to go, although we might need to deal with code duplication then (the two methods do almost exactly the same thing) but...

> Since the transition matrix or transfer (Perron-Frobenius) operator plays a central role in our package, we also wrote code for it and we noticed that the approach here used...

@rusandris Is there any application you can think of in StateTransitionsNetworks.jl where you'll need the visitors?