experiment loop - #26
Merged
Merged
Conversation
|
This pull request introduces 2 alerts when merging fcfb912 into 6ce8462 - view on LGTM.com new alerts:
|
Member
|
Sounds good, will update from way "loss function in dataset" was attempted in #20 |
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
I've wrote a little experiment loop that pretty much ports from Pinot. https://github.com/choderalab/pinot/tree/master/pinot/app
@jchodera I love your 'loss function in dataset' idea and I've included in my datasets object. meanwhile I also feel like to have loss functions defined over graphs would just be a little bit more flexible:
https://github.com/choderalab/espaloma/blob/master/espaloma/metrics.py
let me know what do you think