samuelbroscheit

In Ubuntu 16.04 with python3 this can be fixed by removing python3-pyqt4 and installing python3-pyqt5.

I saw that paper a while ago and I really like it (esp. also the Appendix). I think more metrics are welcome.  Could you provide a PR for this feature?

> We already have the capability to run a training job on arbitrary splits and to select the splits for filtering (in case of negative sampling). E.g., one may simply...

> This would also allow its use from an arbitrary eval job (not necessarily valid) I agree. However, I started with an approach where the TrainingJob was acting depending on...

Should the training job just produce a seperate trace entry and echo it as well? I think its nicer when we retrieve the trace result and do ``` metrics.update( avg_loss=train_trace_entry["avg_loss"],...

> You mean the evaluation job? I'd only copy the avg_loss, the other entries are depending on config settings and do not actually evaluate the model. They can still be...

My current plan is: create `__init_for_train__` and `__init_for_eval__` which are branched to in `__init__` and `run_for_train` and `run_for_eval` which are branched into from `run()`. The `run_epoch()` trace can be retrieved...

> Is this all needed? Why not just stick with `run_epoch` with flag `forward_only`? Ah, did you propose to create the TrainJob but not call run() on it, but only...

Alright makes sense and should be easy to do.T Rainer Gemulla schrieb am Mi., 20. Mai 2020, 14:41: > Advantage: (i) that additional job has our Job API and gathers...

I wonder if eval.type should not take a list of eval types, runs all of them, and collects their metrics into one trace.