You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Our implementation of test_rrule calls pullback twice: once with the tangent to the primal output, and once with the thunk of the tangent.
Should we be doing this?
If the following conjecture is right:
The pullback is only ever called once when doing first-order AD. I.e. there is never a situation when a pullback is reused and called twice.
Then we are probably overly restrictive, as rules like #264 will not be able to be tested even if they are written with RuleConfigs that specify mutation must be supported.
But there might be a simple example to show the above conjecture is wrong, and then the status quo is fine.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Our implementation of
test_rrule
callspullback
twice: once with the tangent to the primal output, and once with the thunk of the tangent.Should we be doing this?
If the following conjecture is right:
The pullback is only ever called once when doing first-order AD. I.e. there is never a situation when a pullback is reused and called twice.
Then we are probably overly restrictive, as rules like #264 will not be able to be tested even if they are written with
RuleConfig
s that specify mutation must be supported.But there might be a simple example to show the above conjecture is wrong, and then the status quo is fine.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: