JuliaDiff / JuliaDiff/ChainRulesCore.jl
`rrules` do not support chunked mode
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Julia
- Stars
- 267
- Forks
- 66
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
This is a general issue, but for a specific incarnation, https://github.com/JuliaDiff/ChainRules.jl/blob/8073c7c4638bdd46f4e822d2ab72423c051c5e4b/src/rulesets/Base/array.jl#L40
function rrule(::typeof(Base.vect), X::Vararg{T, N}) where {T, N}
vect_pullback(ȳ) = (NoTangent(), NTuple{N}(ȳ)...)
return Base.vect(X...), vect_pullback
end
This rule implicitly assumes that ȳ is a Vector, but if you are taking a jacobian, it will be a Matrix in which case, it should be
function rrule(::typeof(Base.vect), X::Vararg{T, N}) where {T, N}
vect_pullback(ȳ) = (NoTangent(), ȳ...)
return Base.vect(X...), vect_pullback
end
Similar problems also exist for the getindex rrules, and I'm sure there are a bunch of other similar cases.
Is there a good general solution to this?
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start with src/rulesets/Base/array.jl at the Base.vect rrule example and inspect the related getindex rrules. Reproduce the difference between vector and matrix cotangents in a Jacobian or chunked-mode case, then survey similar tuple-unpacking assumptions. Done means a reviewed general approach and coverage for the affected rules, but the issue does not name tests or a settled design.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- julia
- Domain
- machine-learning
- Issue type
- Bug
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100