-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 30
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
DifferentiationInterface instead of individual backends? #258
Comments
I don't think DI has a rules system that applies rules to all backends? |
No, for that we would still borrow individual rule systems. But inside of these rules we compute derivatives, and it can be with an arbitrary backend, not only the one we define the rule inside |
As @gdalle said, we would have to implement rules in each rules system, such as ChainRules.jl, but perhaps these could all call a single implementation of the pullback/pushforward. Then I would have to implement the pushback/pullforward using DI with a backend selected with the pre-existing |
I see, yes that part makes sense. Yes it doesn't need the SciMLSensitivity complexity because the differentiation here is pretty trivial, it just needs an easy way to pass what AD to use internally. |
Following our conversation with @lxvm today, opening this issue to keep track of a potential DI integration here (pun intended). What would be the major hurdles?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: