Hacktoberfest 2026：维护者为十月标记出来的 issue，仍然开放、适合新手。 浏览 Hacktoberfest issue

Add a default PruningPolicy that filters out any layers not supported by the API

未关闭
  • 哪里不对？
#1,098 1 条评论 0 个 reaction 已指派 1 人 在 GitHub 查看

@lenscloth 已经在做这个了。

开始于 2023年10月4日。

评估

这个 Issue 还没有评估数据。

描述

feature request

Hi TFMOT team! I have created a workaround for an edge-case in my project, and in my head it should be possible to have it be the default behavior in the API. Creating this feature request as a suggestion - let me know what you think!

System information

Running on TF 2.11. Unfortunately, I currently don't have the bandwidth to contribute the feature request.

Motivation

This feature request is for an implementation of the PruningPolicy that allows pruning for layers that are supported by the PruningRegistry.

Short background. When calling the prune_low_magnitude or similar functions, it's possible to ignore certain layers according to a pruning policy. By implementing the abstract class PruningPolicy, you can check that the model and layers fulfill certain requirements. One built-in implementation of this already exists, namely the PruneForLatencyOnXNNPack. A call can look like this:

model = prune_low_magnitude(
      keras.Sequential([
          layers.Dense(10, activation='relu', input_shape=(100,)),
          layers.Dense(2, activation='sigmoid')
      ]),
      pruning_policy=PruneForLatencyOnXNNPack(),
      **pruning_params)

Currently, since no pruning policy is default, the API will try and prune layers that are not compatible. In one of our use-cases, we had to implement a policy that checks if the layer is supported (to avoid trying to prune a TFOpLambda layer, as an example). Explicitly, we are safeguarding the API by skipping data that itself knows that it doesn't support. I'm suggesting to add another implementation to the API, which simply calls the supports function linked above. If possible, I'd also use it as a default value for the pruning_policy parameter (this part may come with additional issues for some use-cases, so that would be an optional part of this feature request).

I think it would help people using the API to avoid confusing bugs in edge-cases. If there's an existing way to do this that we have overlooked, I'm happy to get that feedback. Let me know if the suggestion needs elaboration.

Thank you for your time!
Annie

主要语言
Python
星标
1.6k
派生
349
30 天内没有已合并 PR

环境准备

  • 没有 Dockerfile 或 Docker Compose 文件
  • 没有 Pull Request 模板
  • 阅读贡献指南

从这里开始

  1. 先读完整个 Issue，再读项目的贡献指南。
  2. 在 Issue 下留言说明你要接手 —— 这能避免两个人做同样的事。
  3. Fork 仓库，在一个分支上完成修改。
  4. 提交 Pull Request，并在描述里引用这个 Issue 编号。

tensorflow/model-optimization 的其他 Issue

查看 tensorflow/model-optimization 的全部 Issue

相似的 Issue

更多 Python Issue

把新 issue 发到你的邮箱

精选适合新手参与的 GitHub issue 摘要。