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'm new to the space and I'm trying to fit all the pieces together conceptually... TENSAT (/~https://github.com/uwplse/tensat) appears to operate in a closely related task. From my understanding, TENSAT is working at a higher level (performing subgraph substitutions of subgraphs of operators) whereas Glenside is a lower-level representation that can optimize the individual implementation of these operators.
Although (I think?) Glenside can process an entire computation graph at once, its rewrite rules focus it on a very different set of optimizations, and trying to shoe-horn in TENSAT's high level rewrites would, even if it is possible, blow up the search space too much for egg.
Conceptually, could the two approaches be combined in a hierarchical fashion in which TENSAT rewrites the computation graph, then Glenside could be used to optimize each operator in isolation?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Your understanding is correct! And they absolutely could! I would love to
see that happen :) I don't have the time to do it myself, but would be glad
to give advice to anyone attempting it.
On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 4:13 AM Zak Singh ***@***.***> wrote:
I'm new to the space and I'm trying to fit all the pieces together
conceptually... TENSAT (/~https://github.com/uwplse/tensat) appears to
operate in a closely related task. From my understanding, TENSAT is working
at a higher level (performing subgraph substitutions of subgraphs of
operators) whereas Glenside is a lower-level representation that can
optimize the individual implementation of these operators.
Although (I think?) Glenside can process an entire computation graph at
once, its rewrite rules focus it on a very different set of optimizations,
and trying to shoe-horn in TENSAT's high level rewrites would, even if it
is possible, blow up the search space too much for egg.
Conceptually, could the two approaches be combined in a hierarchical
fashion in which TENSAT rewrites the computation graph, then Glenside could
be used to optimize each operator in isolation?
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#178>, or unsubscribe
</~https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAJFZALXFX55WB4BHORGRU3VKN5PDANCNFSM5WERUUQA>
.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message
ID: ***@***.***>
I'm new to the space and I'm trying to fit all the pieces together conceptually... TENSAT (/~https://github.com/uwplse/tensat) appears to operate in a closely related task. From my understanding, TENSAT is working at a higher level (performing subgraph substitutions of subgraphs of operators) whereas Glenside is a lower-level representation that can optimize the individual implementation of these operators.
Although (I think?) Glenside can process an entire computation graph at once, its rewrite rules focus it on a very different set of optimizations, and trying to shoe-horn in TENSAT's high level rewrites would, even if it is possible, blow up the search space too much for egg.
Conceptually, could the two approaches be combined in a hierarchical fashion in which TENSAT rewrites the computation graph, then Glenside could be used to optimize each operator in isolation?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: