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

standardized models #7

Closed
rkurchin opened this issue Aug 25, 2020 · 2 comments · Fixed by #8
Closed

standardized models #7

rkurchin opened this issue Aug 25, 2020 · 2 comments · Fixed by #8
Assignees
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@rkurchin
Copy link
Member

Add a new file (presumably just models.jl) that defines some standard model architectures where the user can feed in the hyperparameters and the whole model gets built. Asking @DhairyaLGandhi about the best approach, e.g. just write a function that returns the Chained model, or define a new sort of struct that can act on inputs?

So far I'm only envisioning one, namely the CGCNN archetype from Tian's paper. In that case the necessary parameters would be:

  • input feature length
  • number of convolutions (optionally, type of activation)
  • output feature length
  • type of pooling
  • pooled crystal feature length
  • number of hidden Dense layers (optionally, type of activation)
  • length and type of activation for output (i.e. regression or classification)

We can default to the optimized values from the formation energy case or some nearby round numbers to those...

@rkurchin rkurchin self-assigned this Aug 25, 2020
@rkurchin rkurchin added the enhancement New feature or request label Aug 25, 2020
@DhairyaLGandhi
Copy link
Member

Are there cases where you have a class of models that you can mix and match pieces from other established models from? I'd use them for easier dispatch if it makes sense and if there are certain properties which are needed to be defined on them. Otherwise, keeping it simple and generic with functions makes most sense.

@rkurchin
Copy link
Member Author

I think for some of the stuff I envision adding later (like graph attentional models) that might be true, but for now probably the function approach makes the most sense. Will start to work on this later today!

@rkurchin rkurchin linked a pull request Aug 26, 2020 that will close this issue
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants