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
Is this a new feature, an improvement, or a change to existing functionality?
Change
How would you describe the priority of this feature request
Low (would be nice)
Please provide a clear description of problem this feature solves
MultiResponseMemoryProbs doesn't do much differently than MultiResponseMemory other than enforce that at least one tensor is named "probs" however we want to be a little more flexible and
This would be a breaking change.
Describe your ideal solution
n/a
Describe any alternatives you have considered
No response
Additional context
No response
Code of Conduct
I agree to follow this project's Code of Conduct
I have searched the open feature requests and have found no duplicates for this feature request
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
dagardner-nv
changed the title
[FEA]: Deprecate ResponseMemoryProbs & MultiResponseMemoryProbs in favor of ResponseMemory & MultiResponseMemoryProbs
[FEA]: Deprecate ResponseMemoryProbs & MultiResponseProbsMessage in favor of ResponseMemory & MultiResponseMessage
Feb 15, 2023
* Log a deprecation warning from the constructor for `ResponseMemoryProbs` & `MultiResponseMemoryProbs`
* Replace usage of `ResponseMemoryProbs` with `ResponseMemory`
* Replace usage of `MultiResponseProbsMessage` with `MultiResponseMessage`
* `AddClassificationsStage` and `AddScoresStage` now accept an optional `output_name="probs"` constructor argument.
* *breaking* Any custom stages which only return `MultiResponseMemoryProbs` from the `accepted_types` method will fail during pipeline build.
* Includes changes in PR #655fixes#697
Authors:
- David Gardner (/~https://github.com/dagardner-nv)
- Michael Demoret (/~https://github.com/mdemoret-nv)
Approvers:
- Michael Demoret (/~https://github.com/mdemoret-nv)
URL: #711
Is this a new feature, an improvement, or a change to existing functionality?
Change
How would you describe the priority of this feature request
Low (would be nice)
Please provide a clear description of problem this feature solves
MultiResponseMemoryProbs
doesn't do much differently thanMultiResponseMemory
other than enforce that at least one tensor is named "probs" however we want to be a little more flexible andThis would be a breaking change.
Describe your ideal solution
n/a
Describe any alternatives you have considered
No response
Additional context
No response
Code of Conduct
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: