Information Retrieval (4/5) #146
Conversation
lucadiliello
requested review from
ananyahjha93,
Borda,
edenlightning,
justusschock,
SkafteNicki and
tchaton
as code owners
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #146 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 96.77% 96.81% +0.03%
==========================================
Files 156 80 -76
Lines 4842 2450 -2392
==========================================
- Hits 4686 2372 -2314
+ Misses 156 78 -78
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
| of the `Recall` over each query. | ||
|
|
||
| Args: | ||
| query_without_relevant_docs: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| query_without_relevant_docs: | |
| miss_query_action: |
the argument doe not help with the meaning so let's keep it compact
There was a problem hiding this comment.
if we make this change then all the other retrieval metrics should also be changed
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes, or if you have any better name suggestions? @lucadiliello
cc: @PyTorchLightning/core-metrics
There was a problem hiding this comment.
miss_query_action sounds good. I suggest also empty_target_action because this is the case when target.sum() == 0.
|
Don't know why test |
Before submitting
What does this PR do?
Implements Recall (@k) for Information Retrieval. More info here.
PR review
Anyone in the community is free to review the PR once the tests have passed.
If we didn't discuss your PR in Github issues there's a high chance it will not be merged.
Did you have fun?
Make sure you had fun coding 🙃