Skip to content

Conversation

@saitcakmak
Copy link
Contributor

Summary:
Adds support for log-transforming log-scale choice parameters.

NOTE: This is irrelevant if we're using OrderedChoiceToIntegerRange transform (since it will become range, ignoring the log-scale input). It will make a difference if we use ChoiceToNumericChoice.

Differential Revision: D87233844

@meta-codesync
Copy link

meta-codesync bot commented Nov 26, 2025

@saitcakmak has exported this pull request. If you are a Meta employee, you can view the originating Diff in D87233844.

@meta-cla meta-cla bot added the CLA Signed Do not delete this pull request or issue due to inactivity. label Nov 26, 2025
saitcakmak added a commit to saitcakmak/Ax that referenced this pull request Nov 26, 2025
Summary:

Adds support for log-transforming log-scale choice parameters.

NOTE: This is irrelevant if we're using `OrderedChoiceToIntegerRange` transform (since it will become range, ignoring the log-scale input). It will make a difference if we use `ChoiceToNumericChoice`.

Differential Revision: D87233844
Summary:

Adds support for log-scale modeling to ChoiceParameter. By default, any numeric choice parameter that demonstrates exponentially scaled values (2, 4, 8, 16, 32, ...) will set `log_scale=True`.

Both SQA & JSON storage is updated to write & read the new field, mirrored after the logic for RangeParameter.

Next diff will add support for this in Log-transform.

NOTE: This is irrelevant if we're using `OrderedChoiceToIntegerRange` transform (since it will become range, ignoring the log-scale input). It will make a difference if we use `ChoiceToNumericChoice`.

Reviewed By: mpolson64

Differential Revision: D87233839
Summary:

Adds support for log-transforming log-scale choice parameters.

NOTE: This is irrelevant if we're using `OrderedChoiceToIntegerRange` transform (since it will become range, ignoring the log-scale input). It will make a difference if we use `ChoiceToNumericChoice`.

Reviewed By: dme65

Differential Revision: D87233844
@meta-codesync
Copy link

meta-codesync bot commented Nov 26, 2025

This pull request has been merged in 73893ee.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

CLA Signed Do not delete this pull request or issue due to inactivity. fb-exported Merged meta-exported

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants