sampled_addmm backward: fix incorrect gradient wrt self #103548
Closed
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
[ghstack-poisoned]
🔗 Helpful Links🧪 See artifacts and rendered test results at hud.pytorch.org/pr/103548
Note: Links to docs will display an error until the docs builds have been completed. ✅ 1 Unrelated FailureAs of commit 4ed23c1: UNSTABLE - The following job failed but was likely due to flakiness present on trunk and has been marked as unstable:
This comment was automatically generated by Dr. CI and updates every 15 minutes. |
This was referenced Jun 13, 2023
nikitaved
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 13, 2023
ghstack-source-id: a639df2ec7b5579743f3cb36560716d46bc227b3 Pull Request resolved: #103548
[ghstack-poisoned]
nikitaved
added
module: sparse
As per title. Previous gradient was only correct under the Sparse Semantics, i.e. with`alpha * (mat1 @ mat2)` ignored. However, then, it is wrongly parametrized in the backward pass, as we need to project the gradient in a generic case. Under this parametrization we can expect `gradcheck` to succeed with either `masked=True` or `masked=False` even after #103518 is fixed. cc pearu . cc alexsamardzic pearu cpuhrsch amjames bhosmer ezyang gchanan albanD zou3519 gqchen soulitzer Lezcano Varal7 [ghstack-poisoned]
As per title. Previous gradient was only correct under the Sparse Semantics, i.e. with`alpha * (mat1 @ mat2)` ignored. However, then, it is wrongly parametrized in the backward pass, as we need to project the gradient in a generic case. Under this parametrization we can expect `gradcheck` to succeed with either `masked=True` or `masked=False` even after #103518 is fixed. cc pearu . cc alexsamardzic pearu cpuhrsch amjames bhosmer ezyang gchanan albanD zou3519 gqchen soulitzer Lezcano Varal7 [ghstack-poisoned]
As per title. Previous gradient was only correct under the Sparse Semantics, i.e. with`alpha * (mat1 @ mat2)` ignored. However, then, it is wrongly parametrized in the backward pass, as we need to project the gradient in a generic case. Under this parametrization we can expect `gradcheck` to succeed with either `masked=True` or `masked=False` even after #103518 is fixed. cc pearu . cc alexsamardzic pearu cpuhrsch amjames bhosmer ezyang gchanan albanD zou3519 gqchen soulitzer Lezcano Varal7 [ghstack-poisoned]
As per title. Previous gradient was only correct under the Sparse Semantics, i.e. with`alpha * (mat1 @ mat2)` ignored. However, then, it is wrongly parametrized in the backward pass, as we need to project the gradient in a generic case. Under this parametrization we can expect `gradcheck` to succeed with either `masked=True` or `masked=False` even after #103518 is fixed. cc pearu . cc alexsamardzic pearu cpuhrsch amjames bhosmer ezyang gchanan albanD zou3519 gqchen soulitzer Lezcano Varal7 [ghstack-poisoned]
As per title. Previous gradient was only correct under the Sparse Semantics, i.e. with`alpha * (mat1 @ mat2)` ignored. However, then, it is wrongly parametrized in the backward pass, as we need to project the gradient in a generic case. Under this parametrization we can expect `gradcheck` to succeed with either `masked=True` or `masked=False` even after #103518 is fixed. cc pearu . cc alexsamardzic pearu cpuhrsch amjames bhosmer ezyang gchanan albanD zou3519 gqchen soulitzer Lezcano Varal7 [ghstack-poisoned]
As per title. Previous gradient was only correct under the Sparse Semantics, i.e. with`alpha * (mat1 @ mat2)` ignored. However, then, it is wrongly parametrized in the backward pass, as we need to project the gradient in a generic case. Under this parametrization we can expect `gradcheck` to succeed with either `masked=True` or `masked=False` even after #103518 is fixed. cc pearu . cc alexsamardzic pearu cpuhrsch amjames bhosmer ezyang gchanan albanD zou3519 gqchen soulitzer Lezcano Varal7 [ghstack-poisoned]
As per title. Previous gradient was only correct under the Sparse Semantics, i.e. with`alpha * (mat1 @ mat2)` ignored. However, then, it is wrongly parametrized in the backward pass, as we need to project the gradient in a generic case. Under this parametrization we can expect `gradcheck` to succeed with either `masked=True` or `masked=False` even after #103518 is fixed. cc pearu . cc alexsamardzic pearu cpuhrsch amjames bhosmer ezyang gchanan albanD zou3519 gqchen soulitzer Lezcano Varal7 [ghstack-poisoned]
As per title. Previous gradient was only correct under the Sparse Semantics, i.e. with`alpha * (mat1 @ mat2)` ignored. However, then, it is wrongly parametrized in the backward pass, as we need to project the gradient in a generic case. Under this parametrization we can expect `gradcheck` to succeed with either `masked=True` or `masked=False` even after #103518 is fixed. cc pearu . cc alexsamardzic pearu cpuhrsch amjames bhosmer ezyang gchanan albanD zou3519 gqchen soulitzer Lezcano Varal7 [ghstack-poisoned]
As per title. Previous gradient was only correct under the Sparse Semantics, i.e. with`alpha * (mat1 @ mat2)` ignored. However, then, it is wrongly parametrized in the backward pass, as we need to project the gradient in a generic case. Under this parametrization we can expect `gradcheck` to succeed with either `masked=True` or `masked=False` even after #103518 is fixed. cc pearu . cc alexsamardzic pearu cpuhrsch amjames bhosmer ezyang gchanan albanD zou3519 gqchen soulitzer Lezcano Varal7 [ghstack-poisoned]
As per title. Previous gradient was only correct under the Sparse Semantics, i.e. with`alpha * (mat1 @ mat2)` ignored. However, then, it is wrongly parametrized in the backward pass, as we need to project the gradient in a generic case. Under this parametrization we can expect `gradcheck` to succeed with either `masked=True` or `masked=False` even after #103518 is fixed. cc pearu . cc alexsamardzic pearu cpuhrsch amjames bhosmer ezyang gchanan albanD zou3519 gqchen soulitzer Lezcano Varal7 [ghstack-poisoned]
As per title. Previous gradient was only correct under the Sparse Semantics, i.e. with`alpha * (mat1 @ mat2)` ignored. However, then, it is wrongly parametrized in the backward pass, as we need to project the gradient in a generic case. Under this parametrization we can expect `gradcheck` to succeed with either `masked=True` or `masked=False` even after #103518 is fixed. cc pearu . cc alexsamardzic pearu cpuhrsch amjames bhosmer ezyang gchanan albanD zou3519 gqchen soulitzer Lezcano Varal7 [ghstack-poisoned]
As per title. Previous gradient was only correct under the Sparse Semantics, i.e. with`alpha * (mat1 @ mat2)` ignored. However, then, it is wrongly parametrized in the backward pass, as we need to project the gradient in a generic case. Under this parametrization we can expect `gradcheck` to succeed with either `masked=True` or `masked=False` even after #103518 is fixed. cc pearu . cc alexsamardzic pearu cpuhrsch amjames bhosmer ezyang gchanan albanD zou3519 gqchen soulitzer Lezcano Varal7 [ghstack-poisoned]
As per title. Previous gradient was only correct under the Sparse Semantics, i.e. with`alpha * (mat1 @ mat2)` ignored. However, then, it is wrongly parametrized in the backward pass, as we need to project the gradient in a generic case. Under this parametrization we can expect `gradcheck` to succeed with either `masked=True` or `masked=False` even after #103518 is fixed. cc pearu . cc alexsamardzic pearu cpuhrsch amjames bhosmer ezyang gchanan albanD zou3519 gqchen soulitzer Lezcano Varal7 [ghstack-poisoned]
As per title. Previous gradient was only correct under the Sparse Semantics, i.e. with`alpha * (mat1 @ mat2)` ignored. However, then, it is wrongly parametrized in the backward pass, as we need to project the gradient in a generic case. Under this parametrization we can expect `gradcheck` to succeed with either `masked=True` or `masked=False` even after #103518 is fixed. cc pearu . cc alexsamardzic pearu cpuhrsch amjames bhosmer ezyang gchanan albanD zou3519 gqchen soulitzer Lezcano Varal7 [ghstack-poisoned]
As per title. Previous gradient was only correct under the Sparse Semantics, i.e. with`alpha * (mat1 @ mat2)` ignored. However, then, it is wrongly parametrized in the backward pass, as we need to project the gradient in a generic case. Under this parametrization we can expect `gradcheck` to succeed with either `masked=True` or `masked=False` even after #103518 is fixed. cc pearu . cc alexsamardzic pearu cpuhrsch amjames bhosmer ezyang gchanan albanD zou3519 gqchen soulitzer Lezcano Varal7 [ghstack-poisoned]
As per title. Previous gradient was only correct under the Sparse Semantics, i.e. with`alpha * (mat1 @ mat2)` ignored. However, then, it is wrongly parametrized in the backward pass, as we need to project the gradient in a generic case. Under this parametrization we can expect `gradcheck` to succeed with either `masked=True` or `masked=False` even after #103518 is fixed. cc pearu . cc alexsamardzic pearu cpuhrsch amjames bhosmer ezyang gchanan albanD zou3519 gqchen soulitzer Lezcano Varal7 [ghstack-poisoned]
|
Looks like this PR hasn't been updated in a while so we're going to go ahead and mark this as |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
As per title. Previous gradient was only correct under the Sparse Semantics, i.e. with
alpha * (mat1 @ mat2)ignored. However, then, it is wrongly parametrized in the backward pass, as we need to project the gradient in a generic case.Under this parametrization we can expect
gradcheckto succeed with eithermasked=Trueormasked=Falseeven after #103518 is fixed.cc @alexsamardzic @pearu @cpuhrsch @amjames @bhosmer @ezyang @gchanan @albanD @zou3519 @gqchen @soulitzer @lezcano @Varal7 .
Stack from ghstack (oldest at bottom):
cc @alexsamardzic @pearu @cpuhrsch @amjames @bhosmer @ezyang @gchanan @albanD @zou3519 @gqchen @soulitzer @lezcano @Varal7