Skip to content

DOC: update CrossEntropyLoss with note and example of incorrect target specification #155649

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Open
wants to merge 9 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

DOC: update CrossEntropyLoss with note and example of incorrect target specification #155649

wants to merge 9 commits into from

Conversation

loganthomas
Copy link
Contributor

@loganthomas loganthomas commented Jun 11, 2025 •
edited by pytorch-bot bot
Loading

@pytorch-bot PyTorch Bot
Copy link

pytorch-bot bot commented Jun 11, 2025 •
edited
Loading

🔗 Helpful Links

🧪 See artifacts and rendered test results at hud.pytorch.org/pr/155649

Note: Links to docs will display an error until the docs builds have been completed.

❌ 1 Cancelled Job

As of commit 8bf57b5 with merge base 2259dbe (image):

CANCELLED JOB - The following job was cancelled. Please retry:

This comment was automatically generated by Dr. CI and updates every 15 minutes.

@github-actions github-actions bot added docathon-h1-2025 medium Label for medium docathon tasks module: docs Related to our documentation, both in docs/ and docblocks module: loss Problem is related to loss function triaged This issue has been looked at a team member, and triaged and prioritized into an appropriate module labels Jun 11, 2025
@loganthomas loganthomas changed the title doc: update CrossEntropyLoss with note and example of incorrect target specification DOC: update CrossEntropyLoss with note and example of incorrect target specification Jun 11, 2025
@svekars svekars added the topic: not user facing topic category label Jun 11, 2025
@loganthomas
Copy link
Contributor Author

@svekars any update on this? Thanks!

@albanD albanD removed their request for review June 16, 2025 13:13
mikaylagawarecki
mikaylagawarecki reviewed Jun 17, 2025
View reviewed changes
mikaylagawarecki
mikaylagawarecki reviewed Jun 17, 2025
View reviewed changes
mikaylagawarecki
mikaylagawarecki approved these changes Jun 17, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@mikaylagawarecki mikaylagawarecki left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks

@loganthomas
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thank you both!

@loganthomas
Copy link
Contributor Author

@svekars any blockers on this PR getting merged? Thanks! 🚀

@loganthomas
Copy link
Contributor Author

@svekars @mikaylagawarecki are there any blockers I can take care of to get this PR merged?

@svekars
Copy link
Contributor

svekars commented Jul 3, 2025

@pytorchbot merge

@pytorch-bot pytorch-bot bot added the ciflow/trunk Trigger trunk jobs on your pull request label Jul 3, 2025
@pytorchmergebot
Copy link
Collaborator

Merge started

Your change will be merged once all checks pass (ETA 0-4 Hours).

Learn more about merging in the wiki.

Questions? Feedback? Please reach out to the PyTorch DevX Team

Advanced Debugging
Check the merge workflow status
here

@pytorchmergebot
Copy link
Collaborator

Merge failed

Reason: 9 mandatory check(s) failed. The first few are:

Dig deeper by viewing the failures on hud

Details for Dev Infra team Raised by workflow job

Failing merge rule: Core Maintainers

@pytorch-bot pytorch-bot bot removed the ciflow/trunk Trigger trunk jobs on your pull request label Jul 7, 2025
@loganthomas
Copy link
Contributor Author

@svekars @mikaylagawarecki trying to sync with latest main to remove merge failures

@pytorch-bot PyTorch Bot
Copy link

pytorch-bot bot commented Jul 8, 2025

Pull workflow has not been scheduled for the PR yet. It could be because author doesn't have permissions to run those or skip-checks keywords were added to PR/commits, aborting merge. Please get/give approval for the workflows and/or remove skip ci decorators before next merge attempt. If you think this is a mistake, please contact PyTorch Dev Infra.

@loganthomas
Copy link
Contributor Author

@pytorchbot merge

@pytorch-bot PyTorch Bot
Copy link

pytorch-bot bot commented Jul 8, 2025

Pull workflow has not been scheduled for the PR yet. It could be because author doesn't have permissions to run those or skip-checks keywords were added to PR/commits, aborting merge. Please get/give approval for the workflows and/or remove skip ci decorators before next merge attempt. If you think this is a mistake, please contact PyTorch Dev Infra.

@loganthomas
Copy link
Contributor Author

@svekars can we try again? I'd love to get this closed out.

@loganthomas
Copy link
Contributor Author

@svekars any chance we can get this across the finish line? It's been a month's time and I'd love to merge this. Thank you!

@sekyondaMeta
Copy link
Collaborator

@pytorchbot merge

@pytorch-bot PyTorch Bot
Copy link

pytorch-bot bot commented Aug 11, 2025

Pull workflow has not been scheduled for the PR yet. It could be because author doesn't have permissions to run those or skip-checks keywords were added to PR/commits, aborting merge. Please get/give approval for the workflows and/or remove skip ci decorators before next merge attempt. If you think this is a mistake, please contact PyTorch Dev Infra.

@mikaylagawarecki
Copy link
Contributor

@pytorchbot merge -r

@pytorch-bot PyTorch Bot
Copy link

pytorch-bot bot commented Aug 11, 2025

Pull workflow has not been scheduled for the PR yet. It could be because author doesn't have permissions to run those or skip-checks keywords were added to PR/commits, aborting merge. Please get/give approval for the workflows and/or remove skip ci decorators before next merge attempt. If you think this is a mistake, please contact PyTorch Dev Infra.

@mikaylagawarecki
Copy link
Contributor

@pytorchbot rebase

@pytorchmergebot
Copy link
Collaborator

@pytorchbot started a rebase job onto refs/remotes/origin/viable/strict. Check the current status here

@pytorchmergebot
Copy link
Collaborator

Successfully rebased doc/134771-xent-loss onto refs/remotes/origin/viable/strict, please pull locally before adding more changes (for example, via git checkout doc/134771-xent-loss && git pull --rebase)

@mikaylagawarecki
Copy link
Contributor

@pytorchbot merge

@pytorch-bot pytorch-bot bot added the ciflow/trunk Trigger trunk jobs on your pull request label Aug 11, 2025
@pytorchmergebot
Copy link
Collaborator

Merge started

Your change will be merged once all checks pass (ETA 0-4 Hours).

Learn more about merging in the wiki.

Questions? Feedback? Please reach out to the PyTorch DevX Team

Advanced Debugging
Check the merge workflow status
here

@pytorchmergebot
Copy link
Collaborator

The merge job was canceled or timed out. This most often happen if two merge requests were issued for the same PR, or if merge job was waiting for more than 6 hours for tests to finish. In later case, please do not hesitate to reissue the merge command
For more information see pytorch-bot wiki.

@loganthomas
Copy link
Contributor Author

@pytorchbot merge

@pytorchmergebot
Copy link
Collaborator

Merge started

Your change will be merged once all checks pass (ETA 0-4 Hours).

Learn more about merging in the wiki.

Questions? Feedback? Please reach out to the PyTorch DevX Team

Advanced Debugging
Check the merge workflow status
here

@pytorchmergebot
Copy link
Collaborator

Merge failed

Reason: 1 jobs have failed, first few of them are: trunk / macos-py3-arm64 / build

Details for Dev Infra team Raised by workflow job

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@mikaylagawarecki mikaylagawarecki mikaylagawarecki approved these changes

@jbschlosser jbschlosser Awaiting requested review from jbschlosser jbschlosser is a code owner

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
ciflow/trunk Trigger trunk jobs on your pull request docathon-h1-2025 medium Label for medium docathon tasks module: docs Related to our documentation, both in docs/ and docblocks module: loss Problem is related to loss function open source topic: not user facing topic category triaged This issue has been looked at a team member, and triaged and prioritized into an appropriate module
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Setting the tensor of the values out of [0,1] to target argument of nn.CrossEntropyLoss() with class probabilities works against the doc
6 participants
@loganthomas @svekars @pytorchmergebot @sekyondaMeta @mikaylagawarecki @pytorchbot