Closed phi-friday closed 2 months ago
Is this in reference to #138?
Is this in reference to #138?
No, it's not related. I was curious about the example(especially async) and read it, but there was some unsupported code in the latest version(master), so I fixed it.
All I did was change tornado
to asyncio
and http.server
,
and UtilityFunction
to UpperConfidenceBound
.
I honestly never had a close look at the async example in the docs. If I understand correctly, the idea is to run multiple optimizers in parallel? Why would that be advantageous, considering that they're operating on limited information?
In any case, if we want to keep an example like this I think it would make sense to replace the other file with this version. For now, I would like to wait and see if someone can explain whether this make sense conceptually before making a decision.
I'm currently leaning towards deleting the async example from the folder entirely, I'm not sure it's really needed and evidently we're not good at maintaining it. What do you think?
I'm currently leaning towards deleting the async example from the folder entirely, I'm not sure it's really needed and evidently we're not good at maintaining it. What do you think?
This PR was not rewritten with a full understanding of BayesianOptimization, it simply fixed the point where the error occurred, so if you think it's right to delete it, I agree. When I was fixing this example, I also felt it was very awkward.
An async example that does not use
tornado
. Compatible with #447 , #497 .output