Using this, I am able to get the following output:
00:32:03 INFO ======== Results at level_0 ========
00:32:03 INFO Results on Test set at epoch #8 with Loss 0.02354:
[MICRO] accuracy: 0.53093 auc: 0.98799 precision: 0.7335 recall: 0.65783 f1: 0.69361 P@1: 0 P@5: 0 P@8: 0 P@10: 0 P@15: 0
[MACRO] accuracy: 0.19297 auc: 0.93447 precision: 0.28883 recall: 0.25282 f1: 0.26963 P@1: 0.95878 P@5: 0.89359 P@8: 0.82681 P@10: 0.77921 P@15: 0.66222
00:32:03 INFO ======== Results at level_1 ========
00:32:03 INFO Results on Test set at epoch #8 with Loss 0.00541:
[MICRO] accuracy: 0.40399 auc: 0.98824 precision: 0.63812 recall: 0.52405 f1: 0.57549 P@1: 0 P@5: 0 P@8: 0 P@10: 0 P@15: 0
[MACRO] accuracy: 0.06239 auc: 0.91987 precision: 0.09447 recall: 0.08848 f1: 0.09138 P@1: 0.91163 P@5: 0.81109 P@8: 0.73873 P@10: 0.69256 P@15: 0.59085
which looks like the LAAT model result as reported in the paper, How can I reproduce Joint-LAAT model results with AUC of 92 something and f1 score of 10.7 ?
Thanks @Abhinav43, the number reported in the paper is the average of several random runs (detailed in section 4.3). Also, if you round the AUC up to 3 digits you should get 0.920.
Hi, thank you for the paper. I am trying to reproduce the Joint-Laat results, I am using these parameters :
Using this, I am able to get the following output:
which looks like the LAAT model result as reported in the paper, How can I reproduce Joint-LAAT model results with AUC of 92 something and f1 score of 10.7 ?