Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Pass loss in model training callbacks #3963

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Apr 30, 2024
Merged

Conversation

arunppsg
Copy link
Contributor

Description

I have updated callback to accept more metrics, like loss in this PR. This is a breaking change.

Type of change

Please check the option that is related to your PR.

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
    • In this case, we recommend to discuss your modification on GitHub issues before creating the PR
  • Documentations (modification for documents)

Checklist

  • My code follows the style guidelines of this project
    • Run yapf -i <modified file> and check no errors (yapf version must be 0.32.0)
    • Run mypy -p deepchem and check no errors
    • Run flake8 <modified file> --count and check no errors
    • Run python -m doctest <modified file> and check no errors
  • I have performed a self-review of my own code
  • I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
  • I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
  • I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
  • New unit tests pass locally with my changes
  • I have checked my code and corrected any misspellings

Copy link
Member

@rbharath rbharath left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@arunppsg I don't want to make this a breaking change on the callbacks. Let's instead do a try/catch to gracefully handle the previous behavior as well

@arunppsg arunppsg marked this pull request as ready for review April 26, 2024 09:40
@arunppsg
Copy link
Contributor Author

@rbharath the failures are not related to changes in this PR.

@shreyasvinaya
Copy link
Member

@arunppsg can i rerun the torch tests, seems like torch is being fixed to a specific seed

@arunppsg
Copy link
Contributor Author

sure, feel free to do it @shreyasvinaya

Copy link
Member

@rbharath rbharath left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@rbharath rbharath merged commit 867eece into deepchem:master Apr 30, 2024
32 of 44 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants