Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Move test_eval config values into configs #99

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jan 25, 2024
Merged

Conversation

OliviaLynn
Copy link

  • For Code re-org: unify the train scripts #17
  • Moved config values out of any_test_eval_model.py into config files (of which there are now 3 versions: HSC, DC2, DC2_redshift).
  • Reshuffled some of the code into functions for readability.
  • Have no ttouched the config values in any_test_run_tranformers.py
    • My perception is we might split the configs used here into train_head configs vs train_all configs to deal with the last remaining config values--but, I'm just unsure enough about what would be most useful that I'm leaving it be.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 22, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (95146b3) 10.85% compared to head (eeff466) 10.85%.
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main      #99   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   10.85%   10.85%           
=======================================
  Files          25       25           
  Lines        3877     3877           
=======================================
  Hits          421      421           
  Misses       3456     3456           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

# --------- Now we case predictor on model type, and if using dc2 data
# Set misc vals as top level vals
for key in cfg.get("MISC", dict()).keys():
cfg[key] = cfg.MISC[key]
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think you could also do something like this here: cfg.update(cfg.get("MISC", dict())). But what you have is more explicit, so probably best to keep it as is.

Copy link
Collaborator

@drewoldag drewoldag left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This all looks pretty reasonable to me. I left one comment that is just a "you could do it this way too" - feel free to ignore it :)

@OliviaLynn OliviaLynn merged commit 3ba1d50 into main Jan 25, 2024
5 checks passed
@OliviaLynn OliviaLynn deleted the issue/17/unify_train branch January 25, 2024 06:02
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants