-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 201
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
feat: Support for setting aggregation for (Hybrid)RouteLayer #202
Conversation
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #202 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 77.96% 78.00% +0.04%
==========================================
Files 42 42
Lines 2119 2146 +27
==========================================
+ Hits 1652 1674 +22
- Misses 467 472 +5 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
@jamescalam Just realized that the So can it be deleted? I can do this now in this PR, if of interest, as well as add |
I also see that |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thank you for the contribution! I agree that only using sum
tends to favor Routes with more utterances.
Very small nitpick on the choice of naming the aggregation strings. We want to keep in line with the Pandas lowercase aggregation function names.
Just ran tests with this in one of my projects. Works fine! :] But of course, as a |
fixes #201.
Also fixed:
RL
andHybridRL
top_k
forRouteLayer
similar toHybridRouteLayer
top_k
forRouteLayer
top_k
andaggregation