Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2024 18:52:33 -0400
Summary of current active papers:
P3126-3131: waiting for 2 papers , and identifiers; Aiming for May 2025.
P1708 : LEwg/SG6 needs to look again
P1709 : SG19
Richard presented a revised paper, emphasizing the need to include it in
the next mailing for Poland. The group discussed the importance of feedback
incorporation and the status of various papers, including the background
paper and benchmarking progress. They also explored the integration of
machine learning frameworks like Pytorch into C++, highlighting the need
for a realistic timeline and potential collaboration with AI Alliance
members. The conversation concluded with a focus on improving C++ for
machine learning and the importance of engaging more participants.
Action Items
- [ ] Richard to send the revised version of paper 1708 to the mailing
list and email SG6 to see if they want to look at it again.
- [ ] Phil to make a recommendation to close the graph library paper 1709
- [ ] Scott to connect with David Edelson from the AI Alliance to
discuss the paper on AI frameworks and acceleration technologies.
Outline
- Richard confirms the major change in the paper, which includes
providing source implementation.
- Discussion on the paper number and the need to send the paper to SG6
for review.
- Michael mentions the need to join the OEWG mailing list to contribute
to discussions.
Discussion on Graph Algorithms and Identifiers
- Phil discusses the use of libraries and the implications of exceptions
versus error codes in graph algorithms.
- introduces the concept of identifiers to replace vertex and edge
references, simplifying the design.
- explains the benefits of using identifiers, including reducing the
number of views and simplifying the interface.
- discuss the potential impact of this change on the design and the need
for further review.
- discuss the timeline for paper progress and the need to aim for May
2025 for review.
- mentions the need for more engagement from other participants to meet
the timeline.
- suggests setting a realistic goal and adjusting the timeline if
necessary.
- expresses readiness to travel and attend meetings, emphasizing the
need for progress.
AI Alliance and Machine Learning Frameworks
- Michael introduces the AI Alliance and discusses a paper on various AI
frameworks.
- Scott expresses interest in the paper and mentions the use of multiple
frameworks in their lab.
- Michael explains the goal of showcasing C++'s capabilities in machine
learning and the potential for future papers.
- Scott suggests sharing the paper with their lab to identify gaps in
the technology.
- Michael presents a high-level view of the machine learning ecosystem,
including frameworks, model optimizations, and inference engines.
- Scott discusses the lab's focus on advanced computing and the use of
various frameworks.
- Michael expresses interest in inviting more people and larger groups
to contribute to the machine learning effort.
- Scott suggests focusing on pytorch as a key framework due to its
widespread use.
- discuss the potential of FPGA for machine learning and the challenges
in the current toolchain.
- mentions the low utilization of FPGA for edge deployment and the need
for different packing schemes.
- acknowledges the missing FPGA component in the diagram and plans to
address it in future discussions.
- highlights the research nature of the FPGA toolchain and the need for
maturity in the software.
- plans to bring the machine learning discussion back to the next few
meetings.
- Scott agrees to advertise the opportunity within their division and
identify potential contributors.
- a final question about wording in the paper, and provides guidance on
including GitHub information
On Tue, Oct 8, 2024 at 4:11 PM Michael Wong <fraggamuffin_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Hi, this SG19 meeting will focus on stats and graphs. I know we just met
> 2 weeks ago so there may not be a lot of progress yet,
> in which case this will be just a short recap/planning meeting.
>
> Michael Wong is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
>
> Topic: SG19 monthly
> Time: 2nd Thursdays 02:00 PM Eastern Time (US and Canada)
> Every month on the Second Thu,
>
>
> Join from PC, Mac, Linux, iOS or Android:
>
> https://iso.zoom.us/j/93084591725?pwd=K3QxZjJlcnljaE13ZWU5cTlLNkx0Zz09
> Password: 035530
>
> Or iPhone one-tap :
> US: +13017158592,,93084591725# or +13126266799,,93084591725#
> Or Telephone:
> Dial(for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location):
> US: +1 301 715 8592 or +1 312 626 6799 or +1 346 248 7799 or +1
> 408 638 0968 or +1 646 876 9923 or +1 669 900 6833 or +1 253 215 8782
> or 877 853 5247 (Toll Free)
> Meeting ID: 930 8459 1725
> Password: 035530
> International numbers available: https://iso.zoom.us/u/agewu4X97
>
> Or Skype for Business (Lync):
> https://iso.zoom.us/skype/93084591725
>
> Agenda:
>
> 1. Opening and introductions
>
> The ISO Code of conduct:
> https://www.iso.org/files/live/sites/isoorg/files/store/en/PUB100397.pdf
>
> IEC Code of Conduct:
>
> https://www.iec.ch/basecamp/iec-code-conduct-technical-work
>
> ISO patent policy.
>
>
> https://isotc.iso.org/livelink/livelink/fetch/2000/2122/3770791/Common_Policy.htm?nodeid=6344764&vernum=-2
>
> The WG21 Practices and Procedures and Code of Conduct:
>
> https://isocpp.org/std/standing-documents/sd-4-wg21-practices-and-procedures
>
> 1.1 Roll call of participants
>
Scott M, Phil R, Richard D, Boguslaw C.
>
>
> 1.2 Adopt agenda
>
> 1.3 Approve minutes from previous meeting, and approve publishing
> previously approved minutes to ISOCPP.org
>
> 1.4 Action items from previous meetings
>
> 2. Main issues (125 min)
>
> 2.1 General logistics
>
> Meeting plan, focus on one paper per meeting but does not preclude other
> paper
> updates.
>
> 2024 planning
> C++23 and C++26 status
> CPPCON 2024
>
>
> * Jan 11, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Graph DONE
> * Feb 8, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Graph DONE
> * Mar 14, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Cancelled due to Tokyo 3-18-23
> * Apr 11, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Stats/Graph DONE
> * May 9, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Graph DONE
> * June 13, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Graph; St.louis 6-24-29 DONE
> * July 11, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Stats/ Graphs DONE
> * Aug 15, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Graph DONE
> * Sep 12, 2024 02:00 PM ET: CPPCON Sept 15-20 so canceled DONE
> * Oct 10, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Stats
> * Nov 14, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Cancelled Wroclaw F2F
> * Dec 12, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Graph
>
>
> ISO meeting status
>
> future C++ Std meetings
>
> 2.2 Paper reviews
> Review BSI Graph feedback:
> As Oliver (Rosten) said "The basic premise is important, and it would be
> fantastic to have support for graphs in the standard."
>
> The main items identified were:
> Oliver:
> - This paper is long and incomplete, it has lots of details which I think
> to be irrelevant, however things that are definitely relevant are missing
> from the paper - for example definition of graph - since people have
> different ideas. We need to add a mathematical perspective to the paper.
>
> - The structure of the paper completely changed in the new revision, so now
> it’s hard to understand what and why they have done
>
> - Another missing part is discussion of graph invariants
>
> Tom (Deakin): There’s a big missing part in “Prior art” part, GraphBLAS (
> https://graphblas.org) eminently.
>
> Some other things to add:
>
> 1. The electrical circuit example needs more explanation, and I think this
> will highlight some deep issues around representing things which are
> seemingly trivially graphs, as graphs in practice. In what sense is a
> bog-standard resistor directed? I assume the reason that the graph is
> directed is because current has a sign and in an undirected graph it
> becomes ambiguous which way the current is flowing (also you may want
> components like diodes). But the directed representation also has issues:
> "can current flow from 'Vdd' to 'n0'?" should be immediately answerable
> from the properties of Vdd and its edges. There are other ways to represent
> an electrical circuit. One is as a directed graph but with incident edges
> recorded - but iiuc, this is excluded from the latest version of the paper.
> Alternatively, one could have a mathematical object, the name of which I
> actually don't know: it looks like an undirected graph, but where each
> partial edge has additional, unique, end-point data, as well as the common
> weight. Things like this are the reason why I think we need a broader group
> to look at this proposal (i.e. beyond SG19) and if we possibly can we
> should involve someone from the mathematics community. Otherwise there's a
> real danger we end up missing important insights.
>
> 2. My comment about the structure of the paper changing was a reference to
> previous comparisons with boost::graph. I'm sure these were in an earlier
> version, or am I misremembering? Either way, it would be very helpful to
> have a proper discussion of e.g. the move away from visitors.
>
> 3. Re. the definition of a graph, there needs to be a proper discussion
> about whether the paper's definition of graph is what some authors call a
> multigraph and whether it does/does not include loops. These things are
> mentioned, in passing, when introducing algorithms, but terminology needs
> to be properly established.
>
> 4. I think we're trying to do too much in one go in this paper. I think a
> great first step would be to build on mdspan and try to standardize (or at
> least understand) what might reasonably be called an unstructured span.
> This could be represented as a vector of vectors or as a vector with some
> auxiliary storage indicating where the partitions fall. The point is that
> an unstructured span, with the right invariants, is an adjacency list. If
> we can understand unstructured span and its desirable api, I think this
> will be incredibly valuable guidance for what a standardized graph
> container might look like.
>
> 5. IIUC, this paper excludes pure connectivity graphs. These are incredibly
> helpful and, if I've understood correctly that they are not supported,
> would be a major omission. Another good reason, imo, to start with
> unstructured span!
>
> 6. I'm not convinced by the load api. We don't have a load api for vector
> etc. Moreover, would it not be preferable to have appropriate constructors?
>
>
> 2.2.1: ML topics
>
> 2.2.1.1 Graph Proposal Phil Ratsloff et al
>
> Latest paper:
>
> Here’s a link to the paper (different than the previous paper reviewed).
> There are some additional updates I’m planning on making before the
> meeting.
>
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1OpH-xxRri7tJTtJJIZTYmSHkkrZJkdBwm9zJ7LqolfQ/edit?usp=sharing
>
>
>
>
> P1709R3:
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1kLHhbSTX7j0tPeTYECQFSNx3R35Mu3xO5_dyYdRy4dM/edit?usp=sharing
>
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QkfDzGyfNQKs86y053M0YHOLP6frzhTJqzg1Ug_vkkE/edit?usp=sharing
>
> <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2020/p2119r0.html>
>
> <
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/175wIm8o4BNGti0WLq8U6uZORegKVjmnpfc-_E8PoGS0/edit?ts=5fff27cd#heading=h.9ogkehmdmtel
> *>*
>
> Array copy semantics:
> array copy-semantics paper P1997 "Relaxing Restrictions on Arrays",
> https://wg21.link/p1997
>
> Stats feedback:
>
> P2376R0
> <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2021/p2376r0.pdf>
> Comments
> on Simple Statistical Functions (p1708r4): Contracts, Exceptions and
> Special cases Johan Lundberg
>
> 2.2.1.2 Reinforcement Learning Larry Lewis Jorge Silva
>
> Reinforcement Learning proposal:
>
> 2.2.1.3 Differential Calculus:
>
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/175wIm8o4BNGti0WLq8U6uZORegKVjmnpfc-_E8PoGS0/edit?ts=5fff27cd#heading=h.9ogkehmdmtel
>
> 2.2.1.4: Stats paper
>
> P2681R0
> <https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2022/p2681r0.pdf>
> More
> Stats Functions Richard Dosselmann, Michael Wong
> Current github
>
> https://github.com/cplusplus/papers/issues/475
>
> https://github.com/cplusplus/papers/issues/979
>
> Stats review Richard Dosselman et al
>
> http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2021/p1708r4.pdf
>
> Feedback from Johan Lundberg and Oleksandr Korval
>
> https://isocpp.org/files/papers/D2376R0.pdf
>
> P1708R3: Math proposal for Machine Learning: 3rd review
>
> PXXXX: combinatorics: 1st Review
>
> *> std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2020/p1708r2
> <http://std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2020/p1708r2>*
> *> above is the stats paper that was reviewed in Prague*
> *> http://wiki.edg.com/bin/view/Wg21prague/P1708R2SG19
> <http://wiki.edg.com/bin/view/Wg21prague/P1708R2SG19>*
> *>*
> *> Review Jolanta Polish feedback.*
> *> http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2020/p2119r0.html
> <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2020/p2119r0.html>*
>
>
> 2.2.1.4: Matrix paper
>
> 2.2.3 any other proposal for reviews?
>
> 2.3 Other Papers and proposals
>
> P1416R1: SG19 - Linear Algebra for Data Science and Machine Learning
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IKUNiUhBgRURW-UkspK7fAAyIhfXuMxjk7xKikK4Yp8/edit#heading=h.tj9hitg7dbtr
>
> P1415: Machine Learning Layered list
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1elNFdIXWoetbxjO1OKol_Wj8fyi4Z4hogfj5tLVSj64/edit#heading=h.tj9hitg7dbtr
>
> 2.2.2 SG14 Linear Algebra progress:
> Different layers of proposal
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1poXfr7mUPovJC9ZQ5SDVM_1Nb6oYAXlK_d0ljdUAtSQ/edit
>
> 2.5 Future F2F meetings:
>
> 2.6 future C++ Standard meetings:
> https://isocpp.org/std/meetings-and-participation/upcoming-meetings
>
> None
>
> 3. Any other business
>
> New reflector
>
> http://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/sg19
>
> Old Reflector
> https://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/forum/#!newtopic/sg19
> <https://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/forum/?fromgroups=#!forum/sg14>
>
> Code and proposal Staging area
>
> 4. Review
>
> 4.1 Review and approve resolutions and issues [e.g., changes to SG's
> working draft]
>
> 4.2 Review action items (5 min)
>
> 5. Closing process
>
> 5.1 Establish next agenda
>
>
> 5.2 Future meeting
> * Jan 11, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Graph DONE
> * Feb 8, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Graph DONE
> * Mar 14, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Cancelled due to Tokyo 3-18-23
> * Apr 11, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Stats/Graph DONE
> * May 9, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Graph DONE
> * June 13, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Graph; St.louis 6-24-29 DONE
> * July 11, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Stats
> * Aug 15, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Graph
> * Sep 12, 2024 02:00 PM ET: CPPCON Sept 15-20 so cancelled
> * Oct 10, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Stats
> * Nov 14, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Cancelled Wroclaw F2F
> * Dec 12, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Graph
>
P3126-3131: waiting for 2 papers , and identifiers; Aiming for May 2025.
P1708 : LEwg/SG6 needs to look again
P1709 : SG19
Richard presented a revised paper, emphasizing the need to include it in
the next mailing for Poland. The group discussed the importance of feedback
incorporation and the status of various papers, including the background
paper and benchmarking progress. They also explored the integration of
machine learning frameworks like Pytorch into C++, highlighting the need
for a realistic timeline and potential collaboration with AI Alliance
members. The conversation concluded with a focus on improving C++ for
machine learning and the importance of engaging more participants.
Action Items
- [ ] Richard to send the revised version of paper 1708 to the mailing
list and email SG6 to see if they want to look at it again.
- [ ] Phil to make a recommendation to close the graph library paper 1709
- [ ] Scott to connect with David Edelson from the AI Alliance to
discuss the paper on AI frameworks and acceleration technologies.
Outline
- Richard confirms the major change in the paper, which includes
providing source implementation.
- Discussion on the paper number and the need to send the paper to SG6
for review.
- Michael mentions the need to join the OEWG mailing list to contribute
to discussions.
Discussion on Graph Algorithms and Identifiers
- Phil discusses the use of libraries and the implications of exceptions
versus error codes in graph algorithms.
- introduces the concept of identifiers to replace vertex and edge
references, simplifying the design.
- explains the benefits of using identifiers, including reducing the
number of views and simplifying the interface.
- discuss the potential impact of this change on the design and the need
for further review.
- discuss the timeline for paper progress and the need to aim for May
2025 for review.
- mentions the need for more engagement from other participants to meet
the timeline.
- suggests setting a realistic goal and adjusting the timeline if
necessary.
- expresses readiness to travel and attend meetings, emphasizing the
need for progress.
AI Alliance and Machine Learning Frameworks
- Michael introduces the AI Alliance and discusses a paper on various AI
frameworks.
- Scott expresses interest in the paper and mentions the use of multiple
frameworks in their lab.
- Michael explains the goal of showcasing C++'s capabilities in machine
learning and the potential for future papers.
- Scott suggests sharing the paper with their lab to identify gaps in
the technology.
- Michael presents a high-level view of the machine learning ecosystem,
including frameworks, model optimizations, and inference engines.
- Scott discusses the lab's focus on advanced computing and the use of
various frameworks.
- Michael expresses interest in inviting more people and larger groups
to contribute to the machine learning effort.
- Scott suggests focusing on pytorch as a key framework due to its
widespread use.
- discuss the potential of FPGA for machine learning and the challenges
in the current toolchain.
- mentions the low utilization of FPGA for edge deployment and the need
for different packing schemes.
- acknowledges the missing FPGA component in the diagram and plans to
address it in future discussions.
- highlights the research nature of the FPGA toolchain and the need for
maturity in the software.
- plans to bring the machine learning discussion back to the next few
meetings.
- Scott agrees to advertise the opportunity within their division and
identify potential contributors.
- a final question about wording in the paper, and provides guidance on
including GitHub information
On Tue, Oct 8, 2024 at 4:11 PM Michael Wong <fraggamuffin_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Hi, this SG19 meeting will focus on stats and graphs. I know we just met
> 2 weeks ago so there may not be a lot of progress yet,
> in which case this will be just a short recap/planning meeting.
>
> Michael Wong is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
>
> Topic: SG19 monthly
> Time: 2nd Thursdays 02:00 PM Eastern Time (US and Canada)
> Every month on the Second Thu,
>
>
> Join from PC, Mac, Linux, iOS or Android:
>
> https://iso.zoom.us/j/93084591725?pwd=K3QxZjJlcnljaE13ZWU5cTlLNkx0Zz09
> Password: 035530
>
> Or iPhone one-tap :
> US: +13017158592,,93084591725# or +13126266799,,93084591725#
> Or Telephone:
> Dial(for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location):
> US: +1 301 715 8592 or +1 312 626 6799 or +1 346 248 7799 or +1
> 408 638 0968 or +1 646 876 9923 or +1 669 900 6833 or +1 253 215 8782
> or 877 853 5247 (Toll Free)
> Meeting ID: 930 8459 1725
> Password: 035530
> International numbers available: https://iso.zoom.us/u/agewu4X97
>
> Or Skype for Business (Lync):
> https://iso.zoom.us/skype/93084591725
>
> Agenda:
>
> 1. Opening and introductions
>
> The ISO Code of conduct:
> https://www.iso.org/files/live/sites/isoorg/files/store/en/PUB100397.pdf
>
> IEC Code of Conduct:
>
> https://www.iec.ch/basecamp/iec-code-conduct-technical-work
>
> ISO patent policy.
>
>
> https://isotc.iso.org/livelink/livelink/fetch/2000/2122/3770791/Common_Policy.htm?nodeid=6344764&vernum=-2
>
> The WG21 Practices and Procedures and Code of Conduct:
>
> https://isocpp.org/std/standing-documents/sd-4-wg21-practices-and-procedures
>
> 1.1 Roll call of participants
>
Scott M, Phil R, Richard D, Boguslaw C.
>
>
> 1.2 Adopt agenda
>
> 1.3 Approve minutes from previous meeting, and approve publishing
> previously approved minutes to ISOCPP.org
>
> 1.4 Action items from previous meetings
>
> 2. Main issues (125 min)
>
> 2.1 General logistics
>
> Meeting plan, focus on one paper per meeting but does not preclude other
> paper
> updates.
>
> 2024 planning
> C++23 and C++26 status
> CPPCON 2024
>
>
> * Jan 11, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Graph DONE
> * Feb 8, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Graph DONE
> * Mar 14, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Cancelled due to Tokyo 3-18-23
> * Apr 11, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Stats/Graph DONE
> * May 9, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Graph DONE
> * June 13, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Graph; St.louis 6-24-29 DONE
> * July 11, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Stats/ Graphs DONE
> * Aug 15, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Graph DONE
> * Sep 12, 2024 02:00 PM ET: CPPCON Sept 15-20 so canceled DONE
> * Oct 10, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Stats
> * Nov 14, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Cancelled Wroclaw F2F
> * Dec 12, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Graph
>
>
> ISO meeting status
>
> future C++ Std meetings
>
> 2.2 Paper reviews
> Review BSI Graph feedback:
> As Oliver (Rosten) said "The basic premise is important, and it would be
> fantastic to have support for graphs in the standard."
>
> The main items identified were:
> Oliver:
> - This paper is long and incomplete, it has lots of details which I think
> to be irrelevant, however things that are definitely relevant are missing
> from the paper - for example definition of graph - since people have
> different ideas. We need to add a mathematical perspective to the paper.
>
> - The structure of the paper completely changed in the new revision, so now
> it’s hard to understand what and why they have done
>
> - Another missing part is discussion of graph invariants
>
> Tom (Deakin): There’s a big missing part in “Prior art” part, GraphBLAS (
> https://graphblas.org) eminently.
>
> Some other things to add:
>
> 1. The electrical circuit example needs more explanation, and I think this
> will highlight some deep issues around representing things which are
> seemingly trivially graphs, as graphs in practice. In what sense is a
> bog-standard resistor directed? I assume the reason that the graph is
> directed is because current has a sign and in an undirected graph it
> becomes ambiguous which way the current is flowing (also you may want
> components like diodes). But the directed representation also has issues:
> "can current flow from 'Vdd' to 'n0'?" should be immediately answerable
> from the properties of Vdd and its edges. There are other ways to represent
> an electrical circuit. One is as a directed graph but with incident edges
> recorded - but iiuc, this is excluded from the latest version of the paper.
> Alternatively, one could have a mathematical object, the name of which I
> actually don't know: it looks like an undirected graph, but where each
> partial edge has additional, unique, end-point data, as well as the common
> weight. Things like this are the reason why I think we need a broader group
> to look at this proposal (i.e. beyond SG19) and if we possibly can we
> should involve someone from the mathematics community. Otherwise there's a
> real danger we end up missing important insights.
>
> 2. My comment about the structure of the paper changing was a reference to
> previous comparisons with boost::graph. I'm sure these were in an earlier
> version, or am I misremembering? Either way, it would be very helpful to
> have a proper discussion of e.g. the move away from visitors.
>
> 3. Re. the definition of a graph, there needs to be a proper discussion
> about whether the paper's definition of graph is what some authors call a
> multigraph and whether it does/does not include loops. These things are
> mentioned, in passing, when introducing algorithms, but terminology needs
> to be properly established.
>
> 4. I think we're trying to do too much in one go in this paper. I think a
> great first step would be to build on mdspan and try to standardize (or at
> least understand) what might reasonably be called an unstructured span.
> This could be represented as a vector of vectors or as a vector with some
> auxiliary storage indicating where the partitions fall. The point is that
> an unstructured span, with the right invariants, is an adjacency list. If
> we can understand unstructured span and its desirable api, I think this
> will be incredibly valuable guidance for what a standardized graph
> container might look like.
>
> 5. IIUC, this paper excludes pure connectivity graphs. These are incredibly
> helpful and, if I've understood correctly that they are not supported,
> would be a major omission. Another good reason, imo, to start with
> unstructured span!
>
> 6. I'm not convinced by the load api. We don't have a load api for vector
> etc. Moreover, would it not be preferable to have appropriate constructors?
>
>
> 2.2.1: ML topics
>
> 2.2.1.1 Graph Proposal Phil Ratsloff et al
>
> Latest paper:
>
> Here’s a link to the paper (different than the previous paper reviewed).
> There are some additional updates I’m planning on making before the
> meeting.
>
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1OpH-xxRri7tJTtJJIZTYmSHkkrZJkdBwm9zJ7LqolfQ/edit?usp=sharing
>
>
>
>
> P1709R3:
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1kLHhbSTX7j0tPeTYECQFSNx3R35Mu3xO5_dyYdRy4dM/edit?usp=sharing
>
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QkfDzGyfNQKs86y053M0YHOLP6frzhTJqzg1Ug_vkkE/edit?usp=sharing
>
> <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2020/p2119r0.html>
>
> <
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/175wIm8o4BNGti0WLq8U6uZORegKVjmnpfc-_E8PoGS0/edit?ts=5fff27cd#heading=h.9ogkehmdmtel
> *>*
>
> Array copy semantics:
> array copy-semantics paper P1997 "Relaxing Restrictions on Arrays",
> https://wg21.link/p1997
>
> Stats feedback:
>
> P2376R0
> <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2021/p2376r0.pdf>
> Comments
> on Simple Statistical Functions (p1708r4): Contracts, Exceptions and
> Special cases Johan Lundberg
>
> 2.2.1.2 Reinforcement Learning Larry Lewis Jorge Silva
>
> Reinforcement Learning proposal:
>
> 2.2.1.3 Differential Calculus:
>
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/175wIm8o4BNGti0WLq8U6uZORegKVjmnpfc-_E8PoGS0/edit?ts=5fff27cd#heading=h.9ogkehmdmtel
>
> 2.2.1.4: Stats paper
>
> P2681R0
> <https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2022/p2681r0.pdf>
> More
> Stats Functions Richard Dosselmann, Michael Wong
> Current github
>
> https://github.com/cplusplus/papers/issues/475
>
> https://github.com/cplusplus/papers/issues/979
>
> Stats review Richard Dosselman et al
>
> http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2021/p1708r4.pdf
>
> Feedback from Johan Lundberg and Oleksandr Korval
>
> https://isocpp.org/files/papers/D2376R0.pdf
>
> P1708R3: Math proposal for Machine Learning: 3rd review
>
> PXXXX: combinatorics: 1st Review
>
> *> std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2020/p1708r2
> <http://std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2020/p1708r2>*
> *> above is the stats paper that was reviewed in Prague*
> *> http://wiki.edg.com/bin/view/Wg21prague/P1708R2SG19
> <http://wiki.edg.com/bin/view/Wg21prague/P1708R2SG19>*
> *>*
> *> Review Jolanta Polish feedback.*
> *> http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2020/p2119r0.html
> <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2020/p2119r0.html>*
>
>
> 2.2.1.4: Matrix paper
>
> 2.2.3 any other proposal for reviews?
>
> 2.3 Other Papers and proposals
>
> P1416R1: SG19 - Linear Algebra for Data Science and Machine Learning
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IKUNiUhBgRURW-UkspK7fAAyIhfXuMxjk7xKikK4Yp8/edit#heading=h.tj9hitg7dbtr
>
> P1415: Machine Learning Layered list
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1elNFdIXWoetbxjO1OKol_Wj8fyi4Z4hogfj5tLVSj64/edit#heading=h.tj9hitg7dbtr
>
> 2.2.2 SG14 Linear Algebra progress:
> Different layers of proposal
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1poXfr7mUPovJC9ZQ5SDVM_1Nb6oYAXlK_d0ljdUAtSQ/edit
>
> 2.5 Future F2F meetings:
>
> 2.6 future C++ Standard meetings:
> https://isocpp.org/std/meetings-and-participation/upcoming-meetings
>
> None
>
> 3. Any other business
>
> New reflector
>
> http://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/sg19
>
> Old Reflector
> https://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/forum/#!newtopic/sg19
> <https://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/forum/?fromgroups=#!forum/sg14>
>
> Code and proposal Staging area
>
> 4. Review
>
> 4.1 Review and approve resolutions and issues [e.g., changes to SG's
> working draft]
>
> 4.2 Review action items (5 min)
>
> 5. Closing process
>
> 5.1 Establish next agenda
>
>
> 5.2 Future meeting
> * Jan 11, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Graph DONE
> * Feb 8, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Graph DONE
> * Mar 14, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Cancelled due to Tokyo 3-18-23
> * Apr 11, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Stats/Graph DONE
> * May 9, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Graph DONE
> * June 13, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Graph; St.louis 6-24-29 DONE
> * July 11, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Stats
> * Aug 15, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Graph
> * Sep 12, 2024 02:00 PM ET: CPPCON Sept 15-20 so cancelled
> * Oct 10, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Stats
> * Nov 14, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Cancelled Wroclaw F2F
> * Dec 12, 2024 02:00 PM ET: Graph
>
Received on 2024-10-14 22:52:51