Update Forward Mode to use SciMLStructures #1085
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Checklist
contributor guidelines, in particular the SciML Style Guide and
COLPRAC.
Additional context
Updates the forward mode dispatches to also use the SciMLStructures interface. As with elsewhere, only the tunable portion is respected while constructing the backpass. I have replaced the check for the compatibilty for
pwith that for SciMLStructures, but wanted feedback on whether this is correct. The previous check was trying top <: AbstractArrayso I think we should be covered if we get a SciMLStructure and canonically get the tunables from it.Add any other context about the problem here.
Needs tests