Using the Stan Compiler

Stan is used in most of our interfaces through the Stan compiler stanc. Since version 2.22, the Stan compiler has been implemented in OCaml and is referred to as stanc3. The binary name is still simply stanc, so this document uses both stanc and stanc3 interchangeably.

Command-line options for stanc3

The stanc3 compiler has the following command-line syntax:

> stanc (options) <model_file>

where <model_file> is a path to either a Stan model file ending in suffix .stan or a Stan functions file which ends in .stanfunctions.

The stanc3 options are:

• --help - Displays the complete list of stanc3 options, then exits.

• --version - Display stanc version number

• --info - Print information about the model, such as the type information for variables and the list of used distributions.

• --name=<model_name> - Specify the name of the class used for the implementation of the Stan model in the generated C++ code.

• --o=<file_name> - Specify a path to an output file for generated C++ code (default = .hpp) or auto-formatting output (default: no file/print to stdout)

• --allow-undefined - Do not throw a parser error if there is a function in the Stan program that is declared but not defined in the functions block.

• --include_paths=<dir1,...dirN> - Takes a comma-separated list of directories that may contain a file in an #include directive.

• --use-opencl - If set, will use additional Stan OpenCL features enabled in the Stan-to-C++ compiler.

• --auto-format - Pretty prints the program to the console. See more on auto formatting.

• --canonicalize - Make changes to the program before pretty-printing by specifying options in a comma separated list. Options are ‘deprecations’, ‘parentheses’, ‘braces’, ‘includes’.

• --max-line-length=<number> - Set the column number at which formatting with --auto-format attempts to split lines. The default value is 78, which results in most lines being shorter than 80 characters.

• --print-canonical - Synonymous with --auto-format --canonicalize=[all options].

• --print-cpp - If set, output the generated C++ Stan model class to stdout.

• --standalone-functions - If set, only generate the code for the functions defined in the file. This is the default behavior for .stanfunctions files.

• --O0 (Default) Do not apply optimizations to the Stan code.

• --O1 Apply level 1 compiler optimizations (only basic optimizations).

• --Oexperimental WARNING: This is currently an experimental feature whose components are not thoroughly tested and may not improve a programs performance! Allow the compiler to apply all optimizations to the Stan code.

• --O WARNING: This is currently an experimental feature whose components are not thoroughly tested and may not improve a programs performance! Same as --Oexperimental. Allow the compiler to apply all optimizations to the Stan code.

• --warn-uninitialized - Emit warnings about uninitialized variables to stderr. Currently an experimental feature.

• --warn-pedantic - Emit warnings in Pedantic mode which warns of potential issues in the meaning of your program.

The compiler also provides a number of debug options which are primarily of interest to stanc3 developers; use the --help option to see the full set.

Understanding stanc3 errors and warnings

During model compilation, stanc can produce a variety of errors (issues that prevent the model from being compiled) and warnings (non-fatal issues that should still be considered).

Warnings

Even without the optional --warn-pedantic and --warn-uninitialized command line flags, both of which enable additional warnings, stanc can still produce warnings about your program. In particular, warnings will be produced in two situations

1. A completely blank Stan program will produce the following warning message

   Warning: Empty file 'empty.stan' detected;
       this is a valid stan model but likely unintended!

2. The use of any deprecated features will lead to warnings which will look as follows

   Warning in 'deprecated.stan', line 2, column 0: Comments beginning with # are
    deprecated and this syntax will be removed in Stan 2.32.0. Use // to
    begin line comments; this can be done automatically using stanc
    --auto-format

   A single Stan program can produce many warnings during compilation.

Errors

Errors differ from warnings in their severity and format. In particular, errors are fatal and stop compilation, so at most one error is displayed per run of stanc.

There are five kinds of errors emitted by stanc3

1. File errors occur when the file passed to stanc is either missing or cannot be opened (i.e. has permissions issues). They look like

   Error: file 'notfound.stan' not found or cannot be opened

2. Syntactic errors occur whenever a program violates the Stan language’s syntax requirements. There are three kinds of errors within syntax errors; “lexing” errors mean that the input was unable to be read properly on the character level, “include” errors which occur when the #include directive fails, and “parsing” errors which result when the structure of the program is incorrect.

   • The lexing errors occur due to the use of invalid characters in a program. For example, a lexing error due to the use of $ in a variable name will look like the following.

     Syntax error in 'char.stan', line 2, column 6, lexing error:
     -------------------------------------------------
       1:  data {
       2:     int $ome_variable;
                  ^
       3:  }
     -------------------------------------------------
     Invalid character found.

   • When an include directive is used, it can lead to errors if the included file is not found, or if a file includes itself (including a recursive loop of includes, such as A -> B -> A).

     Syntax error in './incl.stan', line 1, column 0, included from
     './incl.stan', line 1, column 0, included from
     'incl.stan', line 1, column 0, include error:
     -------------------------------------------------
       1:  #include <incl.stan>
           ^
     -------------------------------------------------
     File incl.stan recursively included itself.

   • It is much more common to see parsing errors, which tend to have more in-depth explanations of the error found. For example, if a user forgets to put a size on a type like vector, as in the following, this raises a parsing (structural) error in the compiler.

     Syntax error in vec.stan', line 3, column 10 to column 11, parsing error:
     -------------------------------------------------
       1:  data {
       2:     int<lower=0> N;
       3:     vector x;
                     ^
       4:  }
     -------------------------------------------------
     "[" expression "]" expected for vector size.

3. Semantic errors (also known as type errors) occur when a program is structured correctly but features an error in the type rules imposed by the language. An example of this is assigning a real value to a variable defined as an integer.

   Semantic error in 'type.stan', line 2, column 3 to column 15:
   -------------------------------------------------
     1:  transformed data {
     2:     int x = 1.5;
            ^
     3:  }
   -------------------------------------------------
   Ill-typed arguments supplied to assignment operator =: lhs has
   type int and rhs has type real

4. The compiler will raise an error for use of any removed features for at least one version following their removal. The deprecation warnings mentioned above eventually turn into this kind of error to prompt the user to update their model. After the version of removal, these errors will be converted to one of the other types listed here, depending on the feature.

5. Finally, the compiler can raise an internal error. These are caused by bugs in the compiler, not your model, and we would appreciate it if you report them on the stanc3 repo with the error message provided. These errors usually say something like “This should never happen,” and we apologize if they do.

Pedantic mode

Pedantic mode is a compilation option built into Stanc3 that warns you about potential issues in your Stan program.

For example, consider the following program.

data {
  int N;
  array[N] real x;
}
parameters {
  real sigma;
}
model {
  real mu;
  x ~ normal(mu, sigma);
}

When pedantic mode is turned on, the compiler will produce the following warnings.

Warning:
  The parameter sigma has no priors.
Warning at 'ped-mode-ex1.stan', line 10, column 14 to column 16:
  The variable mu may not have been assigned a value before its use.
Warning at 'ped-mode-ex1.stan', line 10, column 18 to column 23:
  A normal distribution is given parameter sigma as a scale parameter
  (argument 2), but sigma was not constrained to be strictly positive.

Here are the kinds of issues that pedantic mode will find (which are described in more detail in following sections):

• Distribution usages issues. Distribution arguments don’t match the distribution specification, or some specific distribution is used in an inadvisable way.
• Unused parameter. A parameter is defined but doesn’t contribute to target.
• Large or small constant in a distribution. Very large or very small constants are used as distribution arguments.
• Control flow depends on a parameter. Branching control flow (like if/else) depends on a parameter value .
• Parameter has multiple tildes. A parameter is on the left-hand side of multiple tildes.
• Parameter has zero or multiple priors. A parameter has zero or more than one prior distribution.
• Variable is used before assignment. A variable is used before being assigned a value.
• Strict or nonsensical parameter bounds. A parameter is given questionable bounds.
• Nonlinear transformations. When the left-hand side of a tilde statement (or first argument of a log probability function) contains a nonlinear transform which may require a Jacobian change of variables adjustment.

Some important limitations of pedantic mode are listed at the end of this chapter.

Distribution argument and variate constraint issues

When an argument to a built-in distribution certainly does not match that distribution’s specification in the Stan Functions Reference, a warning is thrown. This primarily checks if any distribution argument’s bounds at declaration, compile-time value, or subtype at declaration (e.g. simplex) is incompatible with the domain of the distribution. x

For example, consider the following program.

parameters {
  real unb_p;
  real<lower=0> pos_p;
}
model {
  1 ~ poisson(unb_p);
  1 ~ poisson(pos_p);
}

The parameter of poisson should be strictly positive, but unb_p is not constrained to be positive.

Pedantic mode produces the following warning.

Warning at 'ex-dist-args.stan', line 6, column 14 to column 19:
  A poisson distribution is given parameter unb_p as a rate parameter
  (argument 1), but unb_p was not constrained to be strictly positive.

Special-case distribution issues

Pedantic mode checks for some specific uses of distributions that may indicate a statistical mistake:

Uniform distributions

Any use of uniform distribution generates a warning, except when the variate parameter’s declared upper and lower bounds exactly match the uniform distribution bounds. In general, assigning a parameter a uniform distribution can create non-differentiable boundary conditions and is not recommended.

For example, consider the following program.

parameters {
  real a;
  real<lower=0, upper=1> b;
}
model {
  a ~ uniform(0, 1);
  b ~ uniform(0, 1);
}

a is assigned a uniform distribution that doesn’t match its constraints.

Pedantic mode produces the following warning.

Warning at 'uniform-warn.stan', line 6, column 2 to column 20:
  Parameter a is given a uniform distribution. The uniform distribution is
  not recommended, for two reasons: (a) Except when there are logical or
  physical constraints, it is very unusual for you to be sure that a
  parameter will fall inside a specified range, and (b) The infinite gradient
  induced by a uniform density can cause difficulties for Stan's sampling
  algorithm. As a consequence, we recommend soft constraints rather than hard
  constraints; for example, instead of giving an elasticity parameter a
  uniform(0, 1) distribution, try normal(0.5, 0.5).

(Inverse-) Gamma distributions

Gamma distributions are sometimes used as an attempt to assign an improper prior to a parameter. Pedantic mode gives a warning when the Gamma arguments indicate that this may be the case.

lkj_corr distribution

Any use of the lkj_corr distribution generates a warning that suggests using the Cholesky variant instead. See the LKJ correlation distribution section of the Stan Functions Reference for details.

Unused parameters

A warning is generated when a parameter is declared but does not have any effect on the program. This is determined by checking whether the value of the target variable depends in any way on each of the parameters.

For example, consider the following program.

parameters {
  real a;
  real b;
}
model {
  a ~ normal(1, 1);
}

a participates in the density function but b does not.

Pedantic mode produces the following warning.

Warning:
  The parameter b was declared but was not used in the density calculation.

Large or small constants in a distribution

When numbers with magnitude less than 0.1 or greater than 10 are used as arguments to a distribution, it indicates that some parameter is not scaled to unit value, so a warning is thrown. See the efficiency tuning section of the Stan User’s guide for a discussion of scaling parameters.

For example, consider the following program.

parameters {
  real x;
  real y;
}
model {
  x ~ normal(-100, 100);
  y ~ normal(0, 1);
}

The constants -100 and 100 suggest that x is not unit scaled.

Pedantic mode produces the following warning.

Warning at 'constants-warn.stan', line 6, column 14 to column 17:
  Argument -100 suggests there may be parameters that are not unit scale;
  consider rescaling with a multiplier (see manual section 22.12).
Warning at 'constants-warn.stan', line 6, column 19 to column 22:
  Argument 100 suggests there may be parameters that are not unit scale;
  consider rescaling with a multiplier (see manual section 22.12).

Control flow depends on a parameter

Control flow statements, such as if, for and while should not depend on parameters or functions of parameters to determine their branching conditions. This is likely to introduce a discontinuity into the density function. Pedantic mode generates a warning when any branching condition may depend on a parameter value.

For example, consider the following program.

parameters {
  real a;
}
model {
  // x depends on parameter a
  real x = a * a;

  int m;

  // the if-then-else depends on x which depends on a
  if(x > 0) {
    //now m depends on x which depends on a
    m = 1;
  } else {
    m = 2;
  }

  // for loop depends on m -> x -> a
  for (i in 0:m) {
    a ~ normal(i, 1);
  }
}

The if and for statements are control flow that depend (indirectly) on the value of the parameter m.

Pedantic mode produces the following warning.

Warning at 'param-dep-cf-warn.stan', line 11, column 2 to line 16, column 3:
  A control flow statement depends on parameter(s): a.
Warning at 'param-dep-cf-warn.stan', line 19, column 2 to line 21, column 3:
  A control flow statement depends on parameter(s): a.

Parameters with multiple tildes

A warning is generated when a parameter is found on the left-hand side of more than one ~ statements (or an equivalent target += conditional density statement). This pattern is not inherently an issue, but it is unusual and may indicate a mistake.

Pedantic mode only searches for repeated statements, it will not for example generate a warning when a ~ statement is executed repeatedly inside of a loop.

For example, consider the following program.

data {
  real x;
}
parameters {
  real a;
  real b;
}
model {
  a ~ normal(0, 1);
  a ~ normal(x, 1);

  b ~ normal(1, 1);
}

Pedantic mode produces the following warning.

Warning at 'multi-tildes.stan', line 9, column 2 to column 19:
  The parameter a is on the left-hand side of more than one tildes
  statement.

Parameters with zero or multiple priors

A warning is generated when a parameter appears to have greater than or less than one prior distribution factor.

This analysis depends on a factor graph representation of a Stan program. A factor F that depends on a parameter P is called a prior factor for P if there is no path in the factor graph from F to any data variable except through P.

One limitation of this approach is that the compiler cannot distinguish between modeled data variables and other convenient uses of data variables such as data sizes or hyperparameters. This warning assumes that all data variables (except for int variables) are modeled data, which may cause extra warnings.

For example, consider the following program.

data {
  real x;
}
parameters {
  real a;
  real b;
  real c;
  real d;
}
model
{
  a ~ normal(0, 1); // this is a prior
  x ~ normal(a, 1); // this is not a prior, since data is involved

  b ~ normal(x, 1); // this is also not a prior, since data is involved

  // this is not a prior for c, since data is involved through b
  // but it is a prior for b, since the data is only involved through b
  c ~ normal(b, 1);

  //these are multiple priors:
  d ~ normal(0, 1);
  1 ~ normal(d, 1);
}

One prior is found for a and for b, while c only has a factor that touches a data variable and d has multiple priors.

Pedantic mode produces the following warning.

Warning:
  The parameter c has no priors.
Warning:
  The parameter d has 2 priors.

Variables used before assignment

A warning is generated when any variable is used before it has been assigned a value.

For example, consider the following program.

transformed data {
  real x;
  if (1 > 2) {
    x = 1;
  } else {
    print("oops");
  }
  print(x);
}

Since x is only assigned in one of the branches of the if statement, it might get to print(x) without having been assigned to.

Pedantic mode produces the following warning.

Warning at 'uninit-warn.stan', line 7, column 8 to column 9:
  The variable x may not have been assigned a value before its use.

Strict or nonsensical parameter bounds

Except when there are logical or physical constraints, it is very unusual for you to be sure that a parameter will fall inside a specified range. A warning is generated for all parameters declared with the bounds <lower=.., upper=..> except for <lower=0, upper=1> or <lower=-1, upper=1>.

In addition, a warning is generated when a parameter bound is found to have lower >= upper.

For example, consider the following program.

parameters {
  real<lower=0, upper=1> a;
  real<lower=-1, upper=1> b;
  real<lower=-2, upper=1012> c;
}
model {
  c ~ normal(b, a);
}

Pedantic mode produces the following warning.

Warning:
  Your Stan program has a parameter c with a lower and upper bound in its
  declaration. These hard constraints are not recommended, for two reasons:
  (a) Except when there are logical or physical constraints, it is very
  unusual for you to be sure that a parameter will fall inside a specified
  range, and (b) The infinite gradient induced by a hard constraint can cause
  difficulties for Stan's sampling algorithm. As a consequence, we recommend
  soft constraints rather than hard constraints; for example, instead of
  constraining an elasticity parameter to fall between 0, and 1, leave it
  unconstrained and give it a normal(0.5, 0.5) prior distribution.

Nonlinear transformations

When a parameter is transformed in a non-linear fashion, an adjustment must be applied to account for distortion caused by the transform. This is discussed in depth in the Changes of variables section.

This portion of pedantic mode tries to detect instances where such an adjustment would be necessary and remind the user.

For example, consider the following program.

parameters {
  real y;
}
model {
  log(y) ~ normal(0,1);
}

Pedantic mode produces the following warning.

Warning:
    Left-hand side of sampling statement (~) may contain a non-linear
    transform of a parameter or local variable. If it does, you need
    to include a target += statement with the log absolute determinant
    of the Jacobian of the transform.

Pedantic mode limitations

• Constant values are sometimes uncomputable

  Pedantic mode attempts to evaluate expressions down to literal values so that they can be used to generate warnings. For example, in the code normal(x, 1 - 2), the expression 1 - 2 will be evaluated to -1, which is not a valid variance argument so a warning is generated. However, this strategy is limited; it is often impossible to fully evaluate expressions in finite time.

• Container types

  Currently, indexed variables are not handled intelligently, so they are treated as monolithic variables. Each analysis treats indexed variables conservatively (erring toward generating fewer warnings).

• Data variables

  The declaration information for data variables is currently not considered, so using data as incompatible arguments to distributions may not generate the appropriate warnings.

• Control flow dependent on parameters in nested functions

  If a parameter is passed as an argument to a user-defined function within another user-defined function, and then some control flow depends on that argument, the appropriate warning will not be thrown.

Automatic updating and formatting of Stan programs

In addition to compiling Stan programs, stanc3 features several flags which can be used to format Stan programs and update them to the most recent Stan syntax by removing any deprecation features which can be automatically replaced.

These flags work for both .stan model files and .stanfunctions function files. They can be combined with --o to redirect the formatted output to a new file.

Automatic formatting

Invoking stanc --auto-format <model_file> will print a version of your model which has been re-formatted. The goal is to have this automatic formatting stay as close as possible to the Stan Program Style Guide. This means spacing, indentation, and line length are all regularized. Some deprecated features, like the use of # for line comments, are replaced, but the goal is mainly to preserve the program while formatting it.

By default, this will try to split lines at or before column 78. This number can be changed using --max-line-length.

Canonicalizing

In addition to automatic formatting, stanc can also “canonicalize” programs by updating deprecated syntax, removing unnecessary parenthesis, and adding braces around bodies of if statements and for and while loops.

This can be done by using stanc --auto-format --canonicalize=... where ... is a comma-separated list of options. Currently these options are:

• deprecations

  Removes deprecated syntax such as replacing deprecated functions with their drop-in replacements.

• parentheses

  Removes unnecessary extra parentheses, such as converting y = ((x-1)) to y = x - 1

• braces

  Places braces around all blocks. For example, the following statement

  if (cond)
    //result

  will be formatted as

  if (cond) {
    //result
  }

  and similarly for both kinds of loops containing a single statement.

• includes

  This will pretty-print code from other files included with #include as part of the program. This was the default behavior prior to Stan 2.29. When not enabled, the pretty-printer output will include the same #include directives as the input program.

Invoking stanc --print-canonical <model_file> is synonymous with running stanc --auto-format --canonicalize=deprecations,braces,parentheses,includes

Known issues

The formatting and canonicalizing features of stanc3 are still under development. The following are some known issues one should be aware of before using either:

• Oddly placed comments

  If your Stan program features comments in unexpected places, such as inside an expression, they may be moved in the process of formatting. Moved comments are prefixed with the string ^^^: to indicate they originally appeared higher in the program.

  We hope to improve this functionality in future versions. For now, this can usually be avoided by manually moving the comment outside of an expression, either by placing it on its own line or following a separator such as a comma or keyword.

• Failure to recreate strange #include structure

  Printing without include inlining (--canonicalize=includes) can fail when includes were used in atypical locations, such as in the middle of statements. We recommend either printing with inlining enabled or reconsidering the use of includes in this way.

Optimization

The stanc3 compiler can optimize the code of Stan model during compilation. The optimized model code behaves the same as unoptimized code, but it may be faster, more memory efficient, or more numerically stable.

This section introduces the available optimization options and describes their effect.

To print out a representation of the optimized Stan program, use the stanc3 command-line flag --debug-optimized-mir-pretty. To print an analogous representation of the Stan program prior to optimization, use the flag --debug-transformed-mir-pretty.

Optimization levels

To turn optimizations on, the user specifies the desired optimization level. The level specifies the set of optimizations to use. The chosen optimizations are used in a specific order, with some of them applied repeatedly.

Optimization levels are specified by the numbers 0 and 1 and the ‘experimental’ tag:

• O0 No optimizations are applied.
• O1 Optimizations that are simple, do not dramatically change the program, and are unlikely to noticeably slow down compile times are applied.
• Oexperimental All optimizations are applied. Some of these are not thorougly tested and may not always improve a programs performance.

O0 is the default setting.

The levels include these optimizations:

• O0 includes no optimizations.
• O1 includes:
  • Dead code elimination
  • Copy propagation
  • Constant propagation
• Oexperimental includes optimizations specified by O1 and also:
  • Automatic-differentiation level optimization
  • One step loop unrolling
  • Expression propagation
  • Partial evaluation
  • Lazy code motion
  • Function inlining
  • Static loop unrolling

In addition, Oexperimental will apply more repetitions of the optimizations, which may increase compile times.

O1 Optimizations

Dead code elimination

Dead code is code that does not affect the behavior of the program. Code is not dead if it affects target, the value of any outside-observable variable like transformed parameters or generated quantities, or side effects such as print statements. Removing dead code can speed up a program by avoiding unnecessary computations.

Example Stan program:

model {
  int i;
  i = 5;
  for (j in 1:10);
  if (0) {
    print("Dead code");
  } else {
    print("Hi!");
  }
}

Compiler representation of program before dead code elimination (simplified from the output of --debug-transformed-mir-pretty):

log_prob {
  int i = 5;
  for(j in 1:10) {
    ;
  }
  if(0) {
    FnPrint__("Dead code");
  } else {
    FnPrint__("Hi!");
  }
}

Compiler representation of program after dead code elimination (simplified from the output of --debug-optimized-mir-pretty):

log_prob {
  int i;
  FnPrint__("Hi!");
}

Constant propagation

Constant propagation replaces uses of a variable which is known to have a constant value C with that constant C. This removes the overhead of looking up the variable, and also makes many other optimizations possible (such as static loop unrolling and partial evaluation).

Example Stan program:

transformed data {
  int n = 100;
  int a[n];
  for (i in 1:n) {
    a[i] = i;
  }
}

Compiler representation of program before constant propagation (simplified from the output of --debug-transformed-mir-pretty):

prepare_data {
  data int n = 100;
  data array[int, n] a;
  for(i in 1:n) {
    a[i] = i;
  }
}

Compiler representation of program after constant propagation (simplified from the output of --debug-optimized-mir-pretty):

prepare_data {
  data int n = 100;
  data array[int, 100] a;
  for(i in 1:100) {
    a[i] = i;
  }
}

Copy propagation

Copy propagation is similar to expression propagation, but only propagates variables rather than arbitrary expressions. This can reduce the complexity of the code for other optimizations such as expression propagation.

Example Stan program:

model {
  int i = 1;
  int j = i;
  int k = i + j;
}

Compiler representation of program before copy propagation (simplified from the output of --debug-transformed-mir-pretty):

log_prob {
    int i = 1;
    int j = i;
    int k = (i + j);
}

Compiler representation of program after copy propagation (simplified from the output of --debug-optimized-mir-pretty):

log_prob {
  int i = 1;
  int j = i;
  int k = (i + i);
}

Partial evaluation

Partial evaluation searches for expressions that we can replace with a faster, simpler, more memory efficient, or more numerically stable expression with the same meaning.

Example Stan program:

model {
  real a = 1 + 1;
  real b = log(1 - a);
  real c = a + b * 5;
}

Compiler representation of program before partial evaluation (simplified from the output of --debug-transformed-mir-pretty):

log_prob {
  real a = (1 + 1);
  real b = log((1 - a));
  real c = (a + (b * 5));
}

Compiler representation of program after partial evaluation (simplified from the output of --debug-optimized-mir-pretty):

log_prob {
  real a = 2;
  real b = log1m(a);
  real c = fma(b, 5, a);
}

0experimental Optimizations

Automatic-differentiation level optimization

Stan variables can have two auto-differentiation (AD) levels: AD or non-AD. AD variables carry gradient information with them, which allows Stan to calculate the log-density gradient, but they also have more overhead than non-AD variables. It is therefore inefficient for a variable to be AD unnecessarily. AD-level optimization sets every variable to be a floating point type unless its gradient is necessary.

Example Stan program:

data {
  real y;
}
model {
  real x = y + 1;
}

Compiler representation of program before AD-level optimization (simplified from the output of --debug-transformed-mir-pretty):

input_vars {
  real y;
}

log_prob {
  real x = (y + 1);
}

Compiler representation of program after AD-level optimization (simplified from the output of --debug-optimized-mir-pretty):

input_vars {
  real y;
}

log_prob {
  data real x = (y + 1);
}

One step loop unrolling

One step loop unrolling is similar to static loop unrolling. However, this optimization only ‘unrolls’ the first loop iteration, and can therefore work even when the total number of iterations is not predictable. This can speed up a program by providing more opportunities for further optimizations such as partial evaluation and lazy code motion.

Example Stan program:

data {
  int n;
}
transformed data {
  int x = 0;
  for (i in 1:n) {
    x += i;
  }
}

Compiler representation of program before one step static loop unrolling (simplified from the output of --debug-transformed-mir-pretty):

prepare_data {
  data int n = FnReadData__("n")[1];
  data int x = 0;
  for(i in 1:n) {
    x = (x + i);
  }
}

Compiler representation of program after one step static loop unrolling (simplified from the output of --debug-optimized-mir-pretty):

prepare_data {
  data int n = FnReadData__("n")[1];
  int x = 0;
  if((n >= 1)) {
    x = (x + 1);
    for(i in (1 + 1):n) {
      x = (x + i);
    }
  }
}

Expression propagation

Constant propagation replaces the uses of a variable which is known to have a constant value E with that constant E. This often results in recalculating the expression, but provides more opportunities for further optimizations such as partial evaluation. Expression propagation is always followed by lazy code motion to avoid unnecessarily recomputing expressions.

Example Stan program:

data {
  int m;
}
transformed data {
  int n = m+1;
  int a[n];
  for (i in 1:n-1) {
    a[i] = i;
  }
}

Compiler representation of program before expression propagation (simplified from the output of --debug-transformed-mir-pretty):

prepare_data {
  data int m = FnReadData__("m")[1];
  data int n = (m + 1);
  data array[int, n] a;
  for(i in 1:(n - 1)) {
    a[i] = i;
  }
}

Compiler representation of program after expression propagation (simplified from the output of --debug-optimized-mir-pretty):

prepare_data {
  data int m = FnReadData__("m")[1];
  data int n = (m + 1);
  data array[int, (m + 1)] a;
  for(i in 1:((m + 1) - 1)) {
    a[i] = i;
  }
}

Lazy code motion

Lazy code motion rearranges the statements and expressions in a program with the goals of:

• Avoiding computing expressions more than once, and
• Computing expressions as late as possible (to minimize the strain on the working memory set).

To accomplish these goals, lazy code motion will perform optimizations such as:

• Moving a repeatedly calculated expression to its own variable (also referred to as common-subexpression elimination)
• Moving an expression outside of a loop if it does not need to be in the loop (also referred to as loop-invariant code motion)

Lazy code motion can make some programs significantly more efficient by avoiding redundant or early computations.

Example Stan program:

model {
  real x;
  real y;
  real z;

  for (i in 1:10) {
    x = sqrt(10);
    y = sqrt(i);
  }
  z = sqrt(10);
}

Compiler representation of program before lazy code motion (simplified from the output of --debug-transformed-mir-pretty):

log_prob {
  real x;
  real y;
  real z;
  for(i in 1:10) {
    x = sqrt(10);
    y = sqrt(i);
  }
  z = sqrt(10);
}

Compiler representation of program after lazy code motion (simplified from the output of --debug-optimized-mir-pretty):

log_prob {
  data real lcm_sym4__;
  data real lcm_sym3__;
  real x;
  real y;
  lcm_sym4__ = sqrt(10);
  real z;
  for(i in 1:10) {
    x = lcm_sym4__;
    y = sqrt(i);
  }
  z = lcm_sym4__;
}

Function inlining

Function inlining replaces each function call to each user-defined function f with the body of f. It does this by copying the function body to the call site and doing appropriately renaming the argument variables. This optimization can speed up a program by avoiding the overhead of a function call and providing more opportunities for further optimizations (such as partial evaluation).

Example Stan program:

functions {
  int incr(int x) {
    int y = 1;
    return x + y;
  }
}
transformed data {
  int a = 2;
  int b = incr(a);
}

Compiler representation of program before function inlining (simplified from the output of --debug-transformed-mir-pretty):

functions {
  int incr(int x) {
    int y = 1;
    return (x + y);
  }
}

prepare_data {
  data int a = 2;
  data int b = incr(a);
}

Compiler representation of program after function inlining (simplified from the output of --debug-optimized-mir-pretty):

prepare_data {
  data int a;
  a = 2;
  data int b;
  data int inline_sym1__;
  data int inline_sym3__;
  inline_sym3__ = 0;
  for(inline_sym4__ in 1:1) {
    int inline_sym2__;
    inline_sym2__ = 1;
    inline_sym3__ = 1;
    inline_sym1__ = (a + inline_sym2__);
    break;
  }
  b = inline_sym1__;
}

In this code, the for loop and break is used to simulate the behavior of a return statement. The value to be returned is held in inline_sym1__. The flag variable inline_sym3__ indicates whether a return has occurred and is necessary to handle return statements nested inside loops within the function body.

Static loop unrolling

Static loop unrolling takes a loop with a predictable number of iterations X and replaces it by writing out the loop body X times. The loop index in each repeat is replaced with the appropriate constant. This optimization can speed up a program by avoiding the overhead of a loop and providing more opportunities for further optimizations (such as partial evaluation).

Example Stan program:

transformed data {
  int x = 0;
  for (i in 1:4) {
    x += i;
  }
}

Compiler representation of program before static loop unrolling (simplified from the output of --debug-transformed-mir-pretty):

prepare_data {
  data int x = 0;
  for(i in 1:4) {
    x = (x + i);
  }
}

Compiler representation of program after static loop unrolling (simplified from the output of --debug-optimized-mir-pretty):

prepare_data {
  data int x;
  x = 0;
  x = (x + 1);
  x = (x + 2);
  x = (x + 3);
  x = (x + 4);
}