Closed danielsnider closed 2 years ago
A quick hot fix to get things running
I looked at it and fixed the bugs described here in PR #65.
This should, however, be seen as a hotfix, not as a proper solution (and in its current form, the MNIST example is still not fully functional, see below).
We currently don't consistently use the num_X_examples
property for evaluating the model. I would say, ideally, all models should follow the same protocol during eval_model
, e.g. evaluate on the train set, validation set, and test set.
This would use the num_X_examples
property, but currently, we are not doing this for most models.
Similarly, we wanted to provide both the param_shapes
and the model_params_types
as properties for submitters, but in most workloads, they are not implemented. Ideally, they would be defined in the framework-agnostic base class of each workload.
For further details see the PR #65.
See PR #71.
Recent merges have caused some bugs when trying to run the mnist workload (both jax and pytorch).
Description
The bugs were introduced sometime between now and this commit (which works):
Steps to Reproduce
or
Source or Possible Fix
I found three bugs, but there are possibly more.
Bug 1.
README.md
is out of date.The
algorithmic_efficiency/submission_runner.py
is now located atsubmission_runner.py
, but the README.md doesn't reflect this change.Bug 2.
random_utils
import issuePossible solution:
Bug 3. Can't instantiate abstract class MnistWorkload
I didn't take a close look at how to fix this. If someone knows they introduced the issue maybe they can take a look. Otherwise, I can take a look but I'm too busy at the moment, sorry.
I hope this bug report helps!