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

Adding the "train" argument back to "postprocess" #315

Open
jwohlwend opened this issue May 11, 2018 · 0 comments
Open

Adding the "train" argument back to "postprocess" #315

jwohlwend opened this issue May 11, 2018 · 0 comments

Comments

@jwohlwend
Copy link

I'd like to make a case for adding the "train" argument back to the Field's postprocess call. Fields tend to be shared across training and test sets, so the train argument was a flexible way to apply different postprocessing at training and test time. One example: using "postprocessing" to add noise to the input text dynamically. Without the train argument, I don't think there is a clean way to deactivate the noise at test time. Happy to take suggestions for work arounds, but I think having the train argument should generalize to more use cases.

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

No branches or pull requests

1 participant