Skip to content

Navigation Menu

Sign in
Appearance settings

Search code, repositories, users, issues, pull requests...

Provide feedback

We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly
Appearance settings

Possible fix for exploding object size #1322

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
Loading
from
Open

Possible fix for exploding object size #1322

wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

sebffischer
Copy link
Collaborator

@sebffischer sebffischer commented May 28, 2025 •
edited
Loading

I am not yet sure whether this has any negative consequences that are problematic.

What do you think about this approach?

If this is a desirable solution to #1320 then I would still need to add more tests.
Also, I think a more robust way to access the inherit class is required.

devtools::load_all("~/gh/torch")
#> ℹ Loading torch

nn_module1 = nn_module("nn_module1",
  initialize = function(data) {
    data
    self$layer = nn_module("layer",
      initialize = function() {
        self$linear = nn_linear(10, 1)
      },
      forward = function(x) {
        self$linear(x)
      }
    )()
  },
  forward = function(x) {
    self$layer(x)
  }
)

pryr::object_size(nn_module1(rnorm(1L)))
#> 916.81 kB
pryr::object_size(nn_module1(rnorm(1000000L)))
#> 916.81 kB


# What will not work:

nn_module2 = nn_module("nn_module1",
  initialize = function(data) {
    f = nnf_relu
    self$layer = nn_module("layer",
      initialize = function() NULL,
      forward = function(x) {
        f(x)
      }
    )()
  },
  forward = function(x) {
    self$layer(x)
  }
)

nn_module2()(torch_randn(1))
#> Error in f(x): could not find function "f"

Created on 2025-05-28 with reprex v2.1.1

dfalbel
dfalbel reviewed May 28, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@dfalbel dfalbel left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks reasonable, although I do think we should not recommend people to define modules within modules. It's better to define them in top level environments. In the worst case scenario its always possible to create a generic module that takes a closure to initialize parameters a a forwardclosure. Eg:

nn_generic_module <- nn_mopdule(
   inititialize = function(init, fwd) {
      self$fwd <- fwd
      self$pars <- lapply(init(), nn_parameter) 
   },
   forward = function(x) {
      self$fwd(pars, x)
   } 
)

dfalbel
dfalbel reviewed May 28, 2025
View reviewed changes
R/nn.R
NULL

default_parent_env = function() {
env = parent.frame(2)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Mayvbve add a comment about the 2 here

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

Reviewers

@dfalbel dfalbel dfalbel left review comments

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants

@sebffischer @dfalbel
Morty Proxy This is a proxified and sanitized view of the page, visit original site.