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

Add learning rate scheduler FAQ #293

Closed
wants to merge 10 commits into from
Closed

Add learning rate scheduler FAQ #293

wants to merge 10 commits into from

Conversation

melihyilmaz
Copy link
Collaborator

I added a FAQ entry describing how users can modify the learning rate scheduler used during training with a single line drop-in replacement in model.py. For reference, we've decided not to provide this as a config option at this time and a result this PR overrides #249 .

Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 13, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (f01c607) 89.74% compared to head (9789a49) 89.09%.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##              dev     #293      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   89.74%   89.09%   -0.66%     
==========================================
  Files          12       12              
  Lines         917      917              
==========================================
- Hits          823      817       -6     
- Misses         94      100       +6     

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

@bittremieux bittremieux changed the base branch from dev to main February 14, 2024 13:23
@bittremieux bittremieux changed the base branch from main to dev February 14, 2024 13:31
@bittremieux bittremieux deleted the add_lr_schedule_faq branch February 14, 2024 13:37
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.

2 participants