Clarified 0-based indexing requirement for OrderedLogistic and OrderedProbit

[kdotmanoj]

…dProbit in discrete.rst

Description

This pull request updates the discrete.rst documentation to clarify the requirement for 0-based indexing in the OrderedLogistic and OrderedProbit distribution entries. This addition aims to help users understand that these distributions expect 0-based indexing for their input data, which is crucial for correct implementation and usage

Related Issue

• Closes DOC: Slightly more clarification about the expected target value indexing of pymc.OrderedLogistic #7422
• Related to #

Checklist

• Checked that the pre-commit linting/style checks pass
• Included tests that prove the fix is effective or that the new feature works
• Added necessary documentation (docstrings and/or example notebooks)
• If you are a pro: each commit corresponds to a relevant logical change

Type of change

• New feature / enhancement
• Bug fix
• Documentation
• Maintenance
• Other (please specify):

---

📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://pymc--7457.org.readthedocs.build/en/7457/

[welcome]

]
💖 Thanks for opening this pull request! 💖 The PyMC community really appreciates your time and effort to contribute to the project. Please make sure you have read our Contributing Guidelines and filled in our pull request template to the best of your ability.

[kdotmanoj]

@twiecki can you please review this :)

[kdotmanoj]

Hi @twiecki,

Thank you for reviewing the PR! I wanted to check if you know when it might be merged.

Thanks!

[welcome]

]
Congrats on merging your first pull request! 🎉 We here at PyMC are proud of you! 💖 Thank you so much for your contribution 🎁

[twiecki]

Thanks!

[ricardoV94]

This shouldn't be in discrete.rst but in the docs of the OrderedLogistic/Probit functions.

Also as @AllenDowney mentioned the description of the distributions are themselves wrong:

pymc/pymc/distributions/discrete.py

Line 1192 in d313012

from 1 to K as a function of some predictor, :math:`\eta`. The