You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I believe the intent here was probably to nest points 3 through 5 as a sublist under point 2, but they ended up as items at the same outer list level.
However, I'd suggest updating this as follows:
"Model output representation" (2 columns): consists of two columns specifying how the model outputs are represented. Both of these columns will be present in all model output data:
output_type ...
output_type_id ...
value contains the model's prediction.
The rationale here is that output_type and output_type_id specify how model outputs are represented, but value is the actual model output rather than metadata about the representation of that output.
(We've iterated on this text in a past PR, but I couldn't quickly find a link with meaningful discussion.)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hi Evan. I remember we talked about this, and I used the structure in the hubEnsembles manuscript. Anyway, I updated the structure as you suggested in PR #202.
Looking at this page: https://hubverse.io/en/latest/user-guide/model-output.html#model-output-format
Screenshot of specific text block:
Comments:
output_type
...output_type_id
...value
contains the model's prediction.The rationale here is that
output_type
andoutput_type_id
specify how model outputs are represented, butvalue
is the actual model output rather than metadata about the representation of that output.(We've iterated on this text in a past PR, but I couldn't quickly find a link with meaningful discussion.)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: