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

Updating Initial Z Parameter Sweep Results #13

Merged
merged 11 commits into from May 10, 2018

Conversation

gwaybio
Copy link
Collaborator

@gwaybio gwaybio commented May 5, 2018

After updates to data processing (#9) and a reorganization of the module (#11), I reran the initial Z sweep. The updated results are below.

While there are many files updated in this PR (2,837), the primary updates are found in the updated README.md. The only script updated is 1.initial-z-sweep/scripts/param_sweep_latent_space_viz.R.

I also removed the colorblindr package dependency because it is not a recipe in conda (see #13).

@gwaybio gwaybio mentioned this pull request May 5, 2018
@jaclyn-taroni
Copy link

I believe the issue you reference for colorblindr should be #14.

Copy link

@jaclyn-taroni jaclyn-taroni left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM outside of some typos and a figure not showing up for me. No need for me to re-review.


A similar pattern appears where lower dimensionality benefits from increased sparsity.
ADAGE models are also generally stable, particularly at high dimensions.

It appears that `learning rate` is globally optimal at 0.0005; epochs at 100; batch size at 50; sparsity at 0; with decreasing noise for larger z dimensions.

![](figures/z_param_adage/z_parameter_adage_bes.png?raw=true)

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

ah, yeah, typo. My bad


### Tied Weights

By constrianing the compression and decompression networks to contain the same weights (tied weights), ADAGE models had variable performance across models.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

constraining

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🤦‍♂️


**Figure 8.** The loss of validation sets at the end of training for 432 tied weight ADAGE models.

It appears the models perform better without any induced sparsity

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Missing a period at the end of this sentence

It appears that `learning rate` is globally optimal at 0.0005; epochs at 100; batch size at 50; and noise and sparsity at 0.
| 5 | 0 | 0.0 | 100 | 50 | 0.0015 | 0.0042 |
| 25 | 0 | 0.0 | 100 | 50 | 0.0015 | 0.0029 |
| 50 | 0.0 | 0 | 100 | 50 | 0.0005 | 0.0023 |

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why 0.0 instead of 0 here?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

a typo - will fix

Copy link

@danich1 danich1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM I agree with Jackie's comments.

@gwaybio gwaybio merged commit 3e4bc75 into greenelab:master May 10, 2018
@gwaybio gwaybio deleted the update-z-summary-results branch May 10, 2018 20:13
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