ML4GW / ML4GW/aframe

Ablation testing of architecture

Open
#475 0 comments 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

merger-time
Dominant language
Python
Stars
18
Forks
28
Avg merge
2d 2h
Merged PRs (30d)
7

Description

The regression branch introduces several changes over the base architecture: a dilated convolutional heatmap predictor after the final residual layer; reflect padding on all Conv1D layers to avoid edge effects; CoordConv (replacing the first Conv1D) to allow the model to learn translation dependence; CoordConv stride=1 to reduce downsampling to 16× for heatmap fidelity; and a temporary switch to ResNet18 for memory. Determine which of these are actually necessary for merger time accuracy, and whether simpler alternatives (e.g. predicting a point estimate with Gaussian NLL loss rather than a full heatmap) are competitive.

Contributor guide

Open the contributing guide

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

Research direction

Start by comparing the regression branch with the base architecture, focusing on the dilated heatmap predictor, reflect padding, CoordConv changes, stride, and ResNet18 switch. Run controlled ablations for each change and compare merger-time accuracy with the Gaussian-NLL point-estimate alternative. Done means identifying which changes are necessary and documenting competitive simpler options.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Assessment

Tech stack
python
Domain
machine-learning
Issue type
Refactor
Difficulty
5/5
Estimated time
Over a week
Activity status
Quiet
Clarity
Needs clarification
Newbie friendliness
35/100

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.