WIP: changes needed to support testing of projected tangents#178
Closed
mzgubic wants to merge 1 commit into
Closed
WIP: changes needed to support testing of projected tangents#178mzgubic wants to merge 1 commit into
projected tangents#178mzgubic wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
Member
|
This seems valid either way. |
Member
|
Seems good. This is technically breaking though. |
Member
Author
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
3 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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
JuliaDiff/ChainRulesCore.jl#380 and JuliaDiff/ChainRules.jl#453 project the tangents in the rules on the correct type. An example is for
Diagonal * Matrix, the tangent ofDiagonalis aDiagonal, not aMatrix(as it used to be so far).When we
projectthe tangent to aDiagonalall the off-diagonal elements become zero. To test these, also the finite differencing must only perturb the diagonal elements of the Diagonal, and not densify it as it does now.I think the reason why the
to_vec(::Diagonal)used to densify the Diagonal is to be able to test those rules anyway, so this is reverting the hack if I understand this correctly?