From dev-return-3757-archive-asf-public=cust-asf.ponee.io@mxnet.incubator.apache.org Thu Jul 26 20:53:22 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by mx-eu-01.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id 8431E180621 for ; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 20:53:21 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 57964 invoked by uid 500); 26 Jul 2018 18:53:20 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@mxnet.incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 57953 invoked by uid 99); 26 Jul 2018 18:53:19 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd2-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 18:53:19 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd2-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd2-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 8D55A1A0624 for ; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 18:53:19 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd2-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.701 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.701 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=disabled Received: from mx1-lw-eu.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd2-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.9]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id G8_XdgnFvh-Y for ; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 18:53:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from relay6-d.mail.gandi.net (relay6-d.mail.gandi.net [217.70.183.198]) by mx1-lw-eu.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-eu.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 45F7E5F386 for ; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 18:53:18 +0000 (UTC) X-Originating-IP: 84.147.228.98 Received: from localhost (p5493E462.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.147.228.98]) (Authenticated sender: leonard@lausen.nl) by relay6-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B9158C0005 for ; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 18:53:11 +0000 (UTC) From: Leonard Lausen To: dev@mxnet.apache.org Cc: Subject: Re: How should MXNet treat nan values? In-Reply-To: <87o9f1ft31.fsf@lausen.nl> References: <87o9f1ft31.fsf@lausen.nl> Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2018 18:53:10 +0000 Message-ID: <87sh453k2x.fsf@lausen.nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Thanks to everyone who made their opinion known. So far the consensus is that any nan handling in MXNet should not affect performance, at least not by default. This still leaves the question open if we should aim for documenting the behavior of MXNet operators under presence of nan values. For example, should we include a sentence in the argmax and topk documentation? Should the 1.3 release notes note the changed behavior of topk? So far this has not been done. Instead any change of operator behavior with respect to nan values is treated as implementation change that is not worth noting to the user. As this can decrease user experience, I advocate for documenting the current behavior and possible future changes. In case there are no objections, is there any way to edit the changelog for the upcoming release?