Skip to content
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

HP Borrowing and Scaling #214

Open
bitfort opened this issue May 23, 2019 · 3 comments
Open

HP Borrowing and Scaling #214

bitfort opened this issue May 23, 2019 · 3 comments
Labels
AI There is an action item here. Backlog An issue to be discussed in a future Working Group, but not the immediate next one.

Comments

@bitfort
Copy link

bitfort commented May 23, 2019

How does HP borrowing work with scaling up a submission?

@bitfort bitfort added Next Meeting Item to be discussed in the next Working Group AI There is an action item here. labels May 23, 2019
@bitfort
Copy link
Author

bitfort commented May 23, 2019

SWG Notes:

Question: during parameter borrowing, can a submitter re-submit on a larger scale? If not, can a submitter submit a non-converging model on a large system in the hopes of borrowing HPs?

Proposal:

To resubmit benchmark B with a larger scale X:

  1. You must have submitted some benchmark C at scale Y where Y>=X -- "Prove you can go that big"
  2. You must have submitted B at a technically comparable so that the only modification in resubmission is HP borrowing
  3. The scale X must be larger than anything else you submitted for benchmark B
  4. You cannot withdraw the benchmark C at scale Y and it must be compliant or made compliant
  5. All submissions must have "converged" (N-1 convergences using olympic scoring)

AI: Review this.

@bitfort bitfort added Backlog An issue to be discussed in a future Working Group, but not the immediate next one. and removed Next Meeting Item to be discussed in the next Working Group labels Jun 11, 2020
@bitfort
Copy link
Author

bitfort commented Jun 11, 2020

Will revisit for v0.8

@jonathan-cohen-nvidia
Copy link
Contributor

@bitfort @petermattson If we are deferring to 0.8, then what did we decide to do for 0.7? I am unclear on the proposed rule or process.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
AI There is an action item here. Backlog An issue to be discussed in a future Working Group, but not the immediate next one.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants