Loss calculation should not permanently change shapes of logits and targets#10
Open
Andrei-Aksionov wants to merge 1 commit intokarpathy:masterfrom
Open
Loss calculation should not permanently change shapes of logits and targets#10Andrei-Aksionov wants to merge 1 commit intokarpathy:masterfrom
Andrei-Aksionov wants to merge 1 commit intokarpathy:masterfrom
Conversation
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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 want to talk about loss calculation in the forward method:
the logic behind the change of shapes was explained in the video, but I don't understand why we change shapes permanently since it's only needed for the loss calculation only.
In the training loop:
xbhas shape of (B, T),ybhas shape (B, T) and one might expect thatlogitswill have (B, T, ...) where in fact it's (B*T, ...).The code works flawlessly simply because we don't do anything with logits, yet I think it's not the most desired behavior, especially considering that this is basically an educational code (or to be precise: an accompanying code for an educational video).
Additional notes
The same could be done with transposing, but since we have batches we need to use Tensor.mT:
Based on my benchmarks (on intel cpu)
.mTis faster than.view, butF.cross_entropyworks significantly faster with 2-D tensor rather than with 3-D, so in this case combo of 'view+F.cross_entropy' is preferable.And this PR includes also one small renaming:
FeedFoward -> FeedForward
I guess Foward is like Forward, but only if you have a thick British accent 😃