You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Current implementation is from the days when DepthwiseConv was the only grouped convolution in Flux. DepthwiseConv was hardcoded to have groups == nin.
I think/hope that constraints can be handled by just applying the current constrains to subsets of the in/out variables. Not sure this will enable the full flexibilty of changing the nin/groups ratio but I'm also not sure if it is meaningful to allow more flexibilty than what the current constraints allow.
What could be the biggest headache is to let the part which creates the new parameter arrays to understand the number of groups and/or the groups/nin ratio from just the selected in/out indicies. Perhaps one needs to be able to pass arbitrary other data in the result from the solver which would require updates to NaiveNASlib.
Will save this one for a rainy day...
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Current implementation is from the days when
DepthwiseConv
was the only grouped convolution in Flux.DepthwiseConv
was hardcoded to havegroups == nin
.I think/hope that constraints can be handled by just applying the current constrains to subsets of the in/out variables. Not sure this will enable the full flexibilty of changing the
nin/groups
ratio but I'm also not sure if it is meaningful to allow more flexibilty than what the current constraints allow.What could be the biggest headache is to let the part which creates the new parameter arrays to understand the number of groups and/or the
groups/nin
ratio from just the selected in/out indicies. Perhaps one needs to be able to pass arbitrary other data in the result from the solver which would require updates toNaiveNASlib
.Will save this one for a rainy day...
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: