Falsely "passed" tests for "conv_forward" & "pool_forward"

Hello everyone,

To the moderators: I think it might be worth cheking the test cases for functions “conv_forward” and “pool_forward” (or adding more test cases?), as the current ones falsely display an “All Tests Passed” message for some code implementations. This brings errors later on, in functions “conv_backward”, “pool_backward”, which might lead to troubleshooting in the wrong code sections, with the involved wasted time & efforts (as it happened to me, for which I am writing :grin: ).

In the upcoming paragraphs I will develop my idea a bit more. Please notice that the following hints, assume that your implementations for “zero_pad”, “conv_single_step”, “create_mask_from_window” and “distribute_value”, are correct:

Function “conv_forward”: If the following code is inserted, the function wrongly passes all tests (notice the code implementation is WRONG, as “stride” is missing / not used):

{moderator edit - solution code removed}

imagen

Later on, “conv_backward” fails on its test, even when the coding is correct (as seen on this image):

{moderator edit - solution code removed}

Function “pool_forward”: Similar situation here, if the following code is inserted, the function wrongly passes all tests (notice the code implementation is WRONG, as “stride” is missing / not used):

{moderator edit - solution code removed}

imagen

Later on, “pool_backward” fails on its test, even when the coding is correct (as seen on this image):

{moderator edit - solution code removed}

Thank you in advance for the attention to this post.

1 Like

There are support tickets already filed for improvements to these unit tests.

Hello @TMosh ,

Where are those “sopport tickets” located? I have searched in the available options for my profile, but I could not find them.

Whenever I find them, is there a way to convert this post into a ticket, without having to type the whole thing again?

Thks

Students do not have access to the Git repo used for the “issues”, but the mentors do. I have already filed a very specific bug about these two errors as of about three weeks ago, but the Course Staff has not posted a fix yet. Sorry!

I will add a link to your post to the bug. After I read your post in more detail, I realized that you have actually added some new information here: the optional “backward” section is also wrong.

1 Like

Hello @paulinpaloalto ,

Thank you very much about your reply!

My doubt was more like a “general knowledge” kind of question, so it is OK if that info is not directly accesible to students, as long as an improvement is available for upcoming, future participants :wink: :+1:

Please consider the case closed, and have a nice day!