move BART to its own module #5058
Merged
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
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #5058 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 78.33% 78.34%
=======================================
Files 129 130 +1
Lines 24427 24430 +3
=======================================
+ Hits 19136 19140 +4
+ Misses 5291 5290 -1
|
4 tasks
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Solves #4884. I do not agree with the characterization of BART as a "model architecture", I think is better to think about it as an stochastic process (or at least as something that approximated that). But GPs have the same description and they are also separated in its own module. Also this separation makes sense when in the near future we (I) add some utilities to work with BART.