Hello Nakul,

> Apologies for getting back so late, I was working on the draft for the 
> proposal.
> I have shared the proposal with mlpack and would appreciate your inputs.

Thanks for the proposal, we will take a look on the draft in the next days and
make comments.

> At the time Udit implemented the perceptron there wasn't any code to implement
> the perceptron using the FNN class.
> 
> If there is a need to rewrite the perceptron using the fnn interface, I would
> work on that too.

If you like you can rewrite the perceptron using the ann modules.

> After your mention of the pole balancing problem, I read more about it and it 
> is
> regarded as a pseudo-standard benchmark test for neuroevolution algorithms, 
> so I
> would implement that as part of testing of the algorithm.

Sounds great, there are a couple of other tests that could be interessting like:
the mountain car task.

Thanks,
Marcus


> On 17 Mar 2016, at 14:11, Nakul Gulati <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Hey Marcus,
> 
> Apologies for getting back so late, I was working on the draft for the 
> proposal. I have shared the proposal with mlpack and would appreciate your 
> inputs.
> 
> At the time Udit implemented the perceptron there wasn't any code to implement
> the perceptron using the FNN class.
> 
> If there is a need to rewrite the perceptron using the fnn interface, I would 
> work on that too. 
> 
> Or the other way. Take a look at the pole balancing problem that could be a 
> neat
> test case.
> 
> After your mention of the pole balancing problem, I read more about it and it 
> is regarded as a pseudo-standard benchmark test for neuroevolution 
> algorithms, so I would implement that as part of testing of the algorithm.
> 
> Regards,
> Nakul
> 
> On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 8:25 PM, Marcus Edel <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> Hello Nakul,
> 
>> I have gone through the literature and have a better understanding of the
>> algorithms and also have been spending time with the source code. It took a
>> little time but now I am acquainted with the source code. After understanding
>> the ann code I went ahead to check out the perceptron code to see it in 
>> action
>> but to my surprise perceptron although being a feed forward single layer 
>> neural
>> network doesn't use fnn code, is there a particular reason for it, am I 
>> missing
>> something?
> 
> At the time Udit implemented the perceptron there wasn't any code to implement
> the perceptron using the FNN class.
> 
>> Also about the GSoC project I feel confident with CNE and NEAT but like you 
>> had
>> mentioned the importance of test cases I would the priority would be to
>> implement CNE with test cases and then move to NEAT.
> 
> Or the other way. Take a look at the pole balancing problem that could be a 
> neat
> test case.
> 
> I hope this is helpful, let me know if I can clarify anything.
> 
> Thanks,
> Marcus
> 
> 
>> On 13 Mar 2016, at 11:53, Nakul Gulati <[email protected] 
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>> 
>> Hey Marcus,
>> 
>> I have gone through the literature and have a better understanding of the 
>> algorithms and also have been spending time with the source code. It took a 
>> little time but now I am acquainted with the source code. After 
>> understanding the ann code I went ahead to check out the perceptron code to 
>> see it in action but to my surprise perceptron although being a feed forward 
>> single layer neural network doesn't use fnn code, is there a particular 
>> reason for it, am I missing something?
>> 
>> Also about the GSoC project I feel confident with CNE and NEAT but like you 
>> had mentioned the importance of test cases I would the priority would be to 
>> implement CNE with test cases and then move to NEAT.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Nakul Gulati
>> Website <https://nakulgulati.com/> || LinkedIn 
>> <http://in.linkedin.com/in/nakulgulati> || GitHub 
>> <https://github.com/nakulgulati/>
>> 
>> On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 7:17 PM, Marcus Edel <[email protected] 
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>> Hello Nakul,
>> 
>> It is a good decision to start with something easy that could be CNE or NEAT.
>> Afterwards, we can use that as a baseline for comparison with other
>> implementation. You should keep in mind, that you have to write tests, for 
>> every
>> evolution algorithm you write, and that often takes more time than the actual
>> implementation. Anyway, this year google made draft proposals part of the
>> proposal workflow. So we can comment on your timeline etc. and give feedback
>> once you submitted your application. Also take a look at:
>> http://write.flossmanuals.net/gsocstudentguide/ 
>> <http://write.flossmanuals.net/gsocstudentguide/>
>> 
>> I hope this is helpful. Let me know if I can clarify anything,
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Marcus
>> 
>>> On 10 Mar 2016, at 04:12, Nakul Gulati <[email protected] 
>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> I am a final year Computer Science and Engineering student. I am interested 
>>> in contributing to the project Neuroevolution algorithms as part of GSoC 
>>> 2016. Some of the courses completed which are relevant to this project are: 
>>> Data Structures and Design and Analysis of Algorithms, Soft Computing and 
>>> Artificial Neural Networks.
>>> 
>>> In order to get better understanding about the project and mlpack, the 
>>> following steps were taken:
>>> Compiled and tested mlpack on OS X
>>> Compiled and tested nes emulator communication code: during this I ended up 
>>> crashing the emulator hosted on mario.urgs.org <http://mario.urgs.org/> 
>>> 4561, link to issue <https://github.com/zoq/nes/issues/1>. Which was 
>>> promptly fixed by Marcus Edel, big shout out to him.
>>> Currently I am studying the reading material, starting with the CNE 
>>> algorithm.
>>> 
>>> For scope of GSoC project I propose to start with the implementation of the 
>>> CNE algorithm at first and then move to a second (name would be specified 
>>> soon) if time permits.
>>> 
>>> I have little trouble setting up an exact timeline for the project. I would 
>>> love to hear your insight about the approach and timeline and if you think 
>>> what I propose is realistic.
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Regards,
>>> Nakul Gulati
>>> Website <https://nakulgulati.com/> || LinkedIn 
>>> <http://in.linkedin.com/in/nakulgulati> || GitHub 
>>> <https://github.com/nakulgulati/>_______________________________________________
>>> mlpack mailing list
>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>> https://mailman.cc.gatech.edu/mailman/listinfo/mlpack 
>>> <https://mailman.cc.gatech.edu/mailman/listinfo/mlpack>
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Regards,
>> Nakul Gulati
>> Website <https://nakulgulati.com/> || LinkedIn 
>> <http://in.linkedin.com/in/nakulgulati> || GitHub 
>> <https://github.com/nakulgulati/>
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Regards,
> Nakul Gulati
> Website <https://nakulgulati.com/> || LinkedIn 
> <http://in.linkedin.com/in/nakulgulati> || GitHub 
> <https://github.com/nakulgulati/>

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

_______________________________________________
mlpack mailing list
[email protected]
https://mailman.cc.gatech.edu/mailman/listinfo/mlpack

Reply via email to