JuliaInterpreter.jl
Flux.jl
JuliaInterpreter.jl | Flux.jl | |
---|---|---|
5 | 22 | |
157 | 4,399 | |
0.6% | 0.6% | |
7.6 | 8.7 | |
about 1 month ago | 4 days ago | |
Julia | Julia | |
GNU General Public License v3.0 or later | GNU General Public License v3.0 or later |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
JuliaInterpreter.jl
-
Do you use Julia for general purpose tasks?
The projects page is a list of suggestions of projects that someone has already said they want to run. If you can find a mentor, you can submit a project for anything. For potential performance improvements, I'd look at https://github.com/JuliaDebug/JuliaInterpreter.jl/issues/206, https://github.com/JuliaDebug/JuliaInterpreter.jl/issues/312, and https://github.com/JuliaDebug/JuliaInterpreter.jl/issues/314. I'm not sure if Tim Holy or Kristoffer have time to mentor a project, but if you're interested in doing a gsoc, ask around in the Julia slack/zulip, and you might be able to find a mentor.
-
Julia 1.7 has been released
I would not go as far as calling it very naive, there has certainly been some work put into optimizing performance within the current design.
There are probably some gains to be had by using a different storage format for the IR though as proposed in [1], but it is difficult to say how much of a difference that will make in practice.
[1] https://github.com/JuliaDebug/JuliaInterpreter.jl/pull/309
-
What's Bad about Julia?
You're right, done some more research and there seems to be an interpreter in the compiler: https://github.com/JuliaDebug/JuliaInterpreter.jl. It's only enabled by putting an annotation, and is mainly used for the debugger, but it's still there.
Still, it still seems to try executing the internal SSA IR in its raw form (which is more geared towards compiling rather than dynamic execution in a VM). I was talking more towards a conventional bytecode interpreter (which you can optimize the hell out of it like LuaJIT did). A bytecode format that is carefully designed for fast execution (in either a stack-based or register-based VM) would be much better for interpreters, but I'm not sure if Julia's language semantics / object model can allow it. Maybe some intelligent people out there can make the whole thing work, is what I was trying to say.
-
Julia: faster than Fortran, cleaner than Numpy
It could, but that is a lot more work than it sounds. It might be easier to make it possible to swap out the compiler for one that is much faster (LLVM is slow but does good optimisations, other compilers like cranelift are faster but produce slower code). There is a Julia interpreter but it was written in Julia itself (it was written to support debuggers), so it doesn't really solve the latency issues.
-
Julia: Faster than Fortran, cleaner than Numpy
If you need to run small scripts and can't switch to a persistent-REPL-based workflow, you might consider starting Julia with the `--compile=min` option. You can also reduce startup times dramatically by building a sysimg with PackageCompiler.jl
There is also technically an interpreter if you want to go that way [1], so in principle it might be possible to do the same trick javascript does, but someone would have to implement that.
[1] https://github.com/JuliaDebug/JuliaInterpreter.jl
Flux.jl
- Julia 1.10 Released
-
What Apple hardware do I need for CUDA-based deep learning tasks?
If you are really committed to running on Apple hardware then take a look at Tensorflow for macOS. Another option is the Julia programming language which has very basic Metal support at a CUDA-like level. FluxML would be the ML framework in Julia. I’m not sure either option will be painless or let you do everything you could do with a Nvidia GPU.
-
[D] ClosedAI license, open-source license which restricts only OpenAI, Microsoft, Google, and Meta from commercial use
Flux dominance!
-
What would be your programming language of choice to implement a JIT compiler ?
I’m no compiler expert but check out flux and zygote https://fluxml.ai/ https://fluxml.ai/
-
Any help or tips for Neural Networks on Computer Clusters
I would suggest you to look into Julia ecosystem instead of C++. Julia is almost identical to Python in terms of how you use it but it's still very fast. You should look into flux.jl package for Julia.
-
[D] Why are we stuck with Python for something that require so much speed and parallelism (neural networks)?
Give Julia a try: https://fluxml.ai
-
Deep Learning With Flux: Loss Doesn't Converge
2) Flux treats softmax a little different than most other activation functions (see here for more details) such as relu and sigmoid. When you pass an activation function into a layer like Dense(3, 32, relu), Flux expects that the function is broadcast over the layer's output. However, softmax cannot be broadcast as it operates over vectors rather than scalars. This means that if you want to use softmax as the final activation in your model, you need to pass it into Chain() like so:
-
“Why I still recommend Julia”
Can you point to a concrete example of one that someone would run into when using the differential equation solvers with the default and recommended Enzyme AD for vector-Jacobian products? I'd be happy to look into it, but there do not currently seem to be any correctness issues in the Enzyme issue tracker that are current (3 issues are open but they all seem to be fixed, other than https://github.com/EnzymeAD/Enzyme.jl/issues/278 which is actually an activity analysis bug in LLVM). So please be more specific. The issue with Enzyme right now seems to moreso be about finding functional forms that compile, and it throws compile-time errors in the event that it cannot fully analyze the program and if it has too much dynamic behavior (example: https://github.com/EnzymeAD/Enzyme.jl/issues/368).
Additional note, we recently did a overhaul of SciMLSensitivity (https://sensitivity.sciml.ai/dev/) and setup a system which amounts to 15 hours of direct unit tests doing a combinatoric check of arguments with 4 hours of downstream testing (https://github.com/SciML/SciMLSensitivity.jl/actions/runs/25...). What that identified is that any remaining issues that can arise are due to the implicit parameters mechanism in Zygote (Zygote.params). To counteract this upstream issue, we (a) try to default to never default to Zygote VJPs whenever we can avoid it (hence defaulting to Enzyme and ReverseDiff first as previously mentioned), and (b) put in a mechanism for early error throwing if Zygote hits any not implemented derivative case with an explicit error message (https://github.com/SciML/SciMLSensitivity.jl/blob/v7.0.1/src...). We have alerted the devs of the machine learning libraries, and from this there has been a lot of movement. In particular, a globals-free machine learning library, Lux.jl, was created with fully explicit parameters https://lux.csail.mit.edu/dev/, and thus by design it cannot have this issue. In addition, the Flux.jl library itself is looking to do a redesign that eliminates implicit parameters (https://github.com/FluxML/Flux.jl/issues/1986). Which design will be the one in the end, that's uncertain right now, but it's clear that no matter what the future designs of the deep learning libraries will fully cut out that part of Zygote.jl. And additionally, the other AD libraries (Enzyme and Diffractor for example) do not have this "feature", so it's an issue that can only arise from a specific (not recommended) way of using Zygote (which now throws explicit error messages early and often if used anywhere near SciML because I don't tolerate it).
So from this, SciML should be rather safe and if not, please share some details and I'd be happy to dig in.
- Flux: The Elegant Machine Learning Stack
-
Jax vs. Julia (Vs PyTorch)
> In his item #1, he links to https://discourse.julialang.org/t/loaderror-when-using-inter... The issue is actually a Zygote bug, a Julia package for auto-differentiation, and is not directly related to Julia codebase (or Flux package) itself. Furthermore, the problematic code is working fine now, because DiffEqFlux has switched to Enzyme, which doesn't have that bug. He should first confirm whether the problem he is citing is actually a problem or not.
> Item #2, again another Zygote bug.
If flux chose a buggy package as a dependency, that's on them, and users are well justified in steering clear of Flux if it has buggy dependencies. As of today, the Project.toml for both Flux and DiffEqFlux still lists Zygote as a dependency. Neither list Enzyme.
https://github.com/FluxML/Flux.jl/blob/master/Project.toml
What are some alternatives?
Diffractor.jl - Next-generation AD
Pytorch - Tensors and Dynamic neural networks in Python with strong GPU acceleration
DaemonMode.jl - Client-Daemon workflow to run faster scripts in Julia
Knet.jl - Koç University deep learning framework.
Tullio.jl - ⅀
tensorflow - An Open Source Machine Learning Framework for Everyone
julia-numpy-fortran-test - Comparing Julia vs Numpy vs Fortran for performance and code simplicity
Transformers.jl - Julia Implementation of Transformer models
Infiltrator.jl - No-overhead breakpoints in Julia
Torch.jl - Sensible extensions for exposing torch in Julia.
rust - Empowering everyone to build reliable and efficient software.
Lux.jl - Explicitly Parameterized Neural Networks in Julia