Closed woodfrog closed 4 years ago
Hi,
Thanks for your interest in our work and your suggestions!
I agree with you, l2-norm on dim 2 should be more reasonable. Worth to try by revising Ln 238 and Ln 250.
Thanks for the reply! Yes, I guess your results might get better after revising L238 and L250.
Hi Kunpeng,
Nice work, and thank you for sharing the code!
Just a question about the l2-norm in the code: It seems that all the l2-norms are applied to the first dimension (for example, this line). But when the tensor shape is something like 128 x 36 x 2048, should the normalization be applied to dim 2? Do you have particular concerns on this, or it might be a bug?
Thanks!