Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Oct 2, 2024. It is now read-only.

Roadmap for V2 of the ML Model Extension #7

Closed
11 of 20 tasks
rbavery opened this issue Feb 6, 2024 · 7 comments
Closed
11 of 20 tasks

Roadmap for V2 of the ML Model Extension #7

rbavery opened this issue Feb 6, 2024 · 7 comments
Assignees

Comments

@rbavery
Copy link

rbavery commented Feb 6, 2024

Below are acceptance criteria for #2 the new version of the ML Model Extension. After all these items are done I think #2 is ready to merge and we can publish a new version 2 release to https://github.com/stac-extensions/ml-model/issues . I'm working on most of these, let me know if you think other acceptance criteria should be included cc @fmigneault

@devisperessutti
Copy link

Added some comments to the HackMD summary file.

Happy to take on some of the tasks above to push this forward.

@rbavery
Copy link
Author

rbavery commented Feb 29, 2024

Hi @devisperessutti thanks a bunch. I talked with Francis and I think the main things left to do are to update the example with the current spec (which I can do) and to make a schema json that follows the README description of the schema.

We now have an example.json that combines required pystac common metadata with required ML Model Extension metadata. do you want to take a stab at writing the schema json and PR that against #2 ? I'm happy to review and assist.

I think improving the spec so that output tasks have their own object structure can be a to do for post Version 2 so that we can start contributing smaller PRs after this large refactor.

@devisperessutti
Copy link

We now have an example.json that combines required pystac common metadata with required ML Model Extension metadata. do you want to take a stab at writing the schema json and PR that against #2 ? I'm happy to review and assist.

Sounds good, I'll try to tackle this early next week.

@fmigneault
Copy link
Collaborator

fmigneault commented Mar 6, 2024

Related by not directly impacting the roadmap: stac-extensions/ml-aoi#8

@fmigneault
Copy link
Collaborator

@rbavery
With rbavery#2, I now got functioning JSON-schema validation against a few JSON examples using different combinations of STAC extensions. I applied a few modifications to the pydantic/pystac definitions to better align with the schema. There might be some discrepancies here and there, such as minItems not perfectly validated the same way, but the eurosat_resnet example loaded as pystac.Item works against the JSON schema as well. I only got a minor validation of bands property that I need to fix to wrap things up (see "FIXME_$ref": "#/$defs/AnyBandsRef" in the schema).

I would like to get your review of rbavery#2 so that we can integrate it in #2, and realign all branches together.

@fmigneault
Copy link
Collaborator

@devisperessutti
I invite you to push updates from your samples in https://github.com/sentinel-hub/stac-ml-example using MLM fields updates from rbavery#2.
Specifically, you can add your samples in the examples/ directory, and then add them to this test (https://github.com/rbavery/dlm-extension/blob/4eb30dab98617dfee4cc6b1e5dbc1d50d4770779/tests/test_schema.py#L8-L18) to validate them against the definitions.
If the test passes, that will allow us to ensure your use cases remain compatible with the extension schema.
Additional feedback/questions welcome.

@fmigneault
Copy link
Collaborator

Moved to crim-ca#4

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants