Pip Liggins

I've been having a look into this issue. I can recreate the error with the most recent PyBaMM release, and narrowed down the cause to the updated `C1`, `R0`, `R1`...

As already mentioned, this is a known problem - it was discussed in the last developer meeting I believe, and in #4300. I'm happy to take this one as my...

Hi @MarkV-ADI - are you using the developer install for pybamm? If so, you'll need to re-run `nox -s dev` to get the IDAKLU solver to recompile. That should get...

Having looked into this, there seem to be 2 separate, but related, issues. They both stem from the fact that the full state vector for all time-steps is not returned...

> If I understand correctly, the last state of cycle N is identical to the first state of cycle N+1. Therefore, if we are already returning last states, we could...

> @pipliggins the integration failing test (`test_DFN.py`, in particular the `test_sei_VonKolzenberg2020` is failing because the `Sign` symbol does not have a `_from_json` method. I am happy to skip the output...

@MarkV-ADI @ejfdickinson's code should work if you don't use the `output_variables` option in the IDAKLU solver. Using the output_variables option reveals a small bug I've noted in #4439.

Hi @Dharshannan, please could you provide some example code which reproduces this issue?

This is an inconsistent bug; a model being solved with a single input parameter used in the input params will raise an expected `SolverError(Input parameters cannot appear in expression for...

> this looks great, does #5191 change this at all? @martinjrobins No, #5191 doesn't touch any of the experiment/cycle solution code.