-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.4k
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
Turn off validation if val_percent_check=0 #646
Comments
One question, why should |
Yeah, you are right, the naming is not correct. It is not real percents but just fractions. So now it is assumed that |
This behavior seems to be absent in the documentation? |
@cmpute mind sending a PRs with docs? |
mentioned in Lightning-AI#646
* edit doc mentioned in #646 * edit doc * underline * class reference Co-authored-by: Adrian Wälchli <aedu.waelchli@gmail.com>
Sorry to exhume this old issue, but this feature doesn't seem to work any longer. These are my trainer arguments:
I'm using this settings to completely avoid the validation dataset, and just overfit a single batch of data over 1000 training steps. |
@miccio-dk this is a very old issue - I'd recommend creating a new one as the project has changed significantly since this was filed. you may also be interested in this: #10888 |
As was suggested by @williamFalcon in #536 (comment)
val_percent_check=0
should turn off the validation loop. But now it will not work because ofSo I suggest to fix it. Moreover I suggest to make more thorough processing of
train_percent_check
andval_check_interval
:*_percent_check
andval_check_interval
to be in the range [0.0; 1.0].num_val_batches
can be equal to0
that will effectively disable validation.num_train_batches
andnum_test_batches
should be at least1
. (See also num_training_batches rounds down, causing 0 batches count #631)val_check_interval
should be at least 1.val_check_interval
to a big value. Maybe in that case we should print a helpful message that validation can be turned off by settingval_percent_check=0
.Any thoughts?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: