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

[Feature Request] Allow cycles between nodes #65

Open
el-agua opened this issue May 24, 2024 · 5 comments
Open

[Feature Request] Allow cycles between nodes #65

el-agua opened this issue May 24, 2024 · 5 comments
Assignees
Labels
front-end For issues where the root is mostly occurring on the front-end stat:contribution welcome Status - We are welcoming of any community contributions for this issue type:feature Feature requests

Comments

@el-agua
Copy link

el-agua commented May 24, 2024

Often times, it may be useful for cycles to be displayed in the graph between individual nodes. Right now, this is impossible.

Example of a control feedback loop

image

Currently, if I tried to construct this graph with individual nodes. You get the following:

image

However, if I create an "in" and "out" node, representing each of these functions as layers, I get the desired behavior.

image

However, this can be quite tedious. Might be useful as a toggle in the settings?

@pkgoogle
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @el-agua, can you help us out and perhaps share model(s) or code to reproduce those models which display both behaviors? Thanks.

@pkgoogle pkgoogle self-assigned this May 28, 2024
@el-agua
Copy link
Author

el-agua commented May 28, 2024

@pkgoogle pkgoogle added under discussion This issue is currently undergoing discussion to determine priority, complexity, and/or tractability and removed stat:awaiting response labels May 28, 2024
@pkgoogle pkgoogle added the front-end For issues where the root is mostly occurring on the front-end label Jun 6, 2024
@pkgoogle
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @el-agua, we're trying to figure out what exactly is the use case for this in order for us to prioritize it correctly. Can you maybe describe your exact use case and the type of model you are using and its use?

@pkgoogle pkgoogle added stat:awaiting response and removed under discussion This issue is currently undergoing discussion to determine priority, complexity, and/or tractability labels Jun 13, 2024
@el-agua
Copy link
Author

el-agua commented Jun 13, 2024

I have found model explorer, using the custom adapter api, to be incredibly useful for modeling large control systems. As with most feedback control, cycles are inevitable.

It seems that with the workaround, the frontend can already support such a display. However, direct support would greatly simplify this. Even something along the lines of visualizing RNN/SSM blocks would benefit from this?

@pkgoogle pkgoogle added under discussion This issue is currently undergoing discussion to determine priority, complexity, and/or tractability priority 3 This issue is recognized but there is a decent amount of uncertainty and discussion stat:contribution welcome Status - We are welcoming of any community contributions for this issue and removed stat:awaiting response labels Jun 17, 2024
@pkgoogle
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @el-agua, since your use case is not specific for ML models, we don't quite have the bandwidth to prioritize this use case. That being said, once the front-end becomes open source we are certainly welcoming contributions to add this. Thanks for your understanding.

@pkgoogle pkgoogle removed under discussion This issue is currently undergoing discussion to determine priority, complexity, and/or tractability priority 3 This issue is recognized but there is a decent amount of uncertainty and discussion labels Jun 21, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
front-end For issues where the root is mostly occurring on the front-end stat:contribution welcome Status - We are welcoming of any community contributions for this issue type:feature Feature requests
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants