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
[ENH] coordination discussion on foundation models, deep learning, backends #6381
Comments
If we go by the topics proposed in GSoC proposals and previous work, we get - for the start:
There are three intersections here:
One possible assignment that avoids conditionalities and duplications for the 1st month would be:
|
please add any corrections, suggestions for improvement, comments, etc - if preferences lie elsewhere, we can of course switch things around. For discussion until the 1st tech meeting where we'll plan. |
Possible further work item could be integration of GluonTS. |
Yes -
|
from May 10 meeting:
|
As discussed in todays mentoring meet with @benHeid, and as mentioned here I will start working on adding support to polars scitype for the first month. Commenting this here to co-ordinate with other mentees and mentors, Please feel free to reply on this if any other mentee is also interested or working on adding polars support. |
I am not too familiar with polars/parallel and distributed functionality yet but would like the opportunity to learn and contribute to adding polars support |
@pranavvp16, @julian-fong, a high-level outline is in this issue here: #5423 (comment) There are two things one could work in parallel:
(and imo these are currently the only two fully parallel items) The "battle plan" for support is - in both packages - first mtype support, then enable support in a few estimators, see if we can support eager and even lazy. I think What are your thoughts? Any preferences? |
Related to This would make it easier to add mtypes with soft dependencies, and someone could pick it up and review - or complete - it. I was also going to look at it soon. |
yess the plan looks good to me for now, but polars doesn't even support index as well as multindex. Also if I'm not wrong we have to get this refactor merged before we can start adding polars mtype support in sktime ?? |
That could be handled the same way, no? Have a column called
No, there is no such conditionality, the refactor would just make it more convenient to add new data container types. |
As per the last conversation with @fkiraly I'll pick up this [ENH] darts adapter #5043 and liaise with @yarnabrina Commenting here to coordinate so It can't collide with any other ongoing task. |
Re polars, to get back to coordinating tasks, current discussion sounds like:
Does this make sense, and does this align with your preferences? |
Excellent - the issue is #1624, could you kindly comment there so I can assign you? |
@julian-fong, |
Opening this issue to coordinating the various summer projects in relation to foundation models, deep learning, backends, interfaces.
Below a list of related umbrella issues and individual issues - for now, focusing on forecasting primarily.
FYI @fnhirwa, @geetu040, @julian-fong, @pranavvp16, @Xinyu-Wu-0000.
FYI mentors @benHeid, @kirilral, @marrov, @onyekaugochukwu, @yarnabrina.
polars
(due tosklearn
and nixtla-verse adoption)AutoTS
adapter #5406The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: