Closed changyun79 closed 6 years ago
We can add that. Thanks to @terrychenism for creating this on SqueezeNet v1.0.
Nobody on our team uses the deploy.prototxt interface very often... we mostly load custom training/testing sets into LMDBs to avoid being bottlenecked by I/O.
Thanks for the quick response. I appreciate if it can be added in.
I'd also appreciate if you could add deploy.txt too.
@besirkurtulmus it's quite easy to make deploy.prototxt with reference train_val.prototxt. You can just modified the input and output layers and there are some reference in Caffe/models directory.
@forresti
I thought one needs deploy.prototxt
to measure the execution time using caffe time
? I appreciate your research is mostly about achieving the same accuracy but what about performance?
I often run caffe time
on train_val.prototxt
files... it works great. :)
@forresti
Thanks! Do you know which batch size gets picked up for benchmarking - from the TRAIN
or TEST
specification?
I think train
. But, caffe time
will print the dimensions of all layers
including the batch size.
On Jul 8, 2016 1:19 AM, "Anton Lokhmotov" notifications@github.com wrote:
forresti Thanks! Do you know which batch size gets picked up for benchmarking - from the TRAIN or TEST specification? Is it deterministic?
— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/DeepScale/SqueezeNet/issues/12#issuecomment-231302519, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/AB7Sqg2wwWGzjM1NGSTmsTVpXGrHcx3jks5qTggrgaJpZM4I2qdc .
What exactly is the difference between the train_val and the deploy prototxt ? What are their different purposes?
@forresti
there's now three PRs to add deploy.txt
for v1.1: #20, #21, #43
Hello, I am wondering why v1.1 does not have deploy.prototxt. Missed commit? Thank you.