Allow passing in task features as part of X in MTGP.posterior #1868
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
facebook-github-bot
added
CLA Signed
|
This pull request was exported from Phabricator. Differential Revision: D46496775 |
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1868 +/- ##
=========================================
Coverage 100.00% 100.00%
=========================================
Files 171 171
Lines 15055 15063 +8
=========================================
+ Hits 15055 15063 +8
📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more |
…h#1868) Summary: Pull Request resolved: pytorch#1868 Prior to this change, `MultiTaskGP` could be evaluated using inputs of shape `batch x d` when using the model directly, and using inputs of shape `batch x d + 1` when the model was wrapped in a `ModelListGP`. This diff (combined with pytorch#1854) legitimizes both input shapes regardless of what API is used to evaluate the model. This will unify the APIs and increase the flexibility in how the model is used. Reviewed By: Balandat Differential Revision: D46496775 fbshipit-source-id: f44f5e529d9105d203923013101c37a8c1697e52
|
This pull request was exported from Phabricator. Differential Revision: D46496775 |
saitcakmak
force-pushed
the
export-D46496775
branch
from
827b7d8 to
5224872
Compare
saitcakmak
added a commit
to saitcakmak/botorch
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 7, 2023
…h#1868) Summary: Pull Request resolved: pytorch#1868 Prior to this change, `MultiTaskGP` could be evaluated using inputs of shape `batch x d` when using the model directly, and using inputs of shape `batch x d + 1` when the model was wrapped in a `ModelListGP`. This diff (combined with pytorch#1854) legitimizes both input shapes regardless of what API is used to evaluate the model. This will unify the APIs and increase the flexibility in how the model is used. Differential Revision: https://internalfb.com/D46496775 fbshipit-source-id: e79dee0cc0ba0cd03fb97382cc1eb9ef4e5a8371
|
This pull request has been merged in f4405e9. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary: Prior to this change,
MultiTaskGPcould be evaluated using inputs of shapebatch x dwhen using the model directly, and using inputs of shapebatch x d + 1when the model was wrapped in aModelListGP. This diff (combined with #1854) legitimizes both input shapes regardless of what API is used to evaluate the model. This will unify the APIs and increase the flexibility in how the model is used.Differential Revision: D46496775