Document LocalCoordinateCoding
#3711
Conversation
|
@rcurtin is this ready for review ? |
shrit
left a comment
shrit
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good to me, one thing I was wondering when I was reading the docs is that technically we should be able to serialize the model with arma::fmat with no problem, or is there anything else that we need to add somewhere?
| * If you want to initialize the dictionary to a custom matrix, consider | ||
| * either writing your own DictionaryInitializer class (with void | ||
| * Initialize(const arma::mat& data, arma::mat& dictionary) function), or call | ||
| * Initialize(const MatType& data, MatType& dictionary) function), or call |
| mat X; | ||
| X.load("mnist_first250_training_4s_and_9s.arm"); | ||
| mat inX; // The .arm file is saved as an arma::mat. | ||
| inX.load("mnist_first250_training_4s_and_9s.arm"); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Never heard of this extension before, 😄
@conradsnicta should patent it
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Data saved in Armadillo's native arma_binary format is platform dependent. It's a "quick-n-dirty" binary format that's meant to be more efficient than CSV or ascii, and less finicky than HDF5. This comes at the cost of being platform and/or OS dependent. For example, stuff saved on an ARM machine may not load on an x86-64 machine and vice-versa.
This is not a problem in many cases, but it's probably not a good idea to have it as part of official mlpack tests, which are meant to work on many platforms. For better portability, suggest to use the CSV format instead.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That's a good point. In 2c035b5, I converted the test data to be stored in .csv instead of the Armadillo binary format. It's very slightly larger in the .tar.bz2 (like 20kb), but I don't think that's a big deal.
![mlpack-bot[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/23934?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
|
@mlpack-jenkins test this please |
3 participants
LocalCoordinateCodingis very similar toSparseCoding, so I went ahead and documented it using the sparse coding documentation as a starting point. Essentially the documentation is the same, since the algorithms are just variations of each other and present identical APIs.Here is a rendered version:
https://www.ratml.org/misc/mlpack-markdown-doc/user/methods/local_coordinate_coding.html
Some notes about code changes that had to happen and other changes too:
MatTypetemplate parameter toLocalCoordinateCodingand adapted tests.core.mdthat came from a different PR, but that PR had passed the documentation build... so I am going to look carefully at the output of the CI job this time and see if it is just ignoring failures or something.