my management liked that in wandb you can make reports on experiments with interactive graphs and that they would be viewed on the Internet + multicursor.
And I think what advantages ClearML has to compensate for this chips.
I thought that maybe someone made a comparison and find the necessary arguments in this comparison.
From the active one, we are still using local placement, logging the console, logging parameters, displaying metrics and debugging the picture with drawing pictures there.
- division into projects, subprojects, and subsubprojects with a minimal description of the key points on the subsubproject page.
You can make reports on experiments with interactive graphs
Yes, I can totally see how this is a selling point. The closest is the Project Overview (full markdown capabilities, with the ability to embed links to specific experiments). You can also add a "leader metric", so you can track the project performance/progress over time.
I have to admit that creating a better reporting tool is always pushed down in priority as I think this is a good selling point to management but the actual users would prefer other features before this one (feel free to correct me if you see it differently).
I would say that from ClearML perspective experiment management is only the beginning, the automation, data, pipeline and serving are also Tasks that need similar capabilities but are more complex, and I believe this is where ClearML shines (obviously I'm biased 🙂 )