Closed senmaoy closed 2 years ago
What training parameters did you use?
What training parameters did you use?
TRAIN: NF: 32 # default 64 BATCH_SIZE: 24 MAX_EPOCH: 601 NET_G: '../test'
I also try NF:64 with batch_size 22. Then the IS increase to 4.46 std 0.15. I use 2925 images for evaluation. I notice that there is no truncation code implemented in the code.
I got a result of mean: 4.41 std: 0.18 on the CUB dataset, which is much worse than 5.1.
What training parameters did you use?
TRAIN: NF: 32 # default 64 BATCH_SIZE: 24 MAX_EPOCH: 601 NET_G: '../test'
I also try NF:64 with batch_size 22. Then the IS increase to 4.46 std 0.15. I use 2925 images for evaluation. I notice that there is no truncation code implemented in the code.
These methods each model generate 30,000 images for evaluation
------------------ 原始邮件 ------------------ 发件人: "tobran/DF-GAN" @.>; 发送时间: 2021年11月9日(星期二) 晚上7:15 @.>; @.**@.>; 主题: Re: [tobran/DF-GAN] Abnormal Inception Score on the CUB dataset (#8)
My training parameters and the IS are the same as yours.
What training parameters did you use?
TRAIN: NF: 32 # default 64 BATCH_SIZE: 24 MAX_EPOCH: 601 NET_G: '../test'
I also try NF:64 with batch_size 22. Then the IS increase to 4.46 std 0.15. I use 2925 images for evaluation. I notice that there is no truncation code implemented in the code.
These methods each model generate 30,000 images for evaluation
— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe. Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS or Android.
I got a result of mean: 4.16 std: 0.15 on the CUB dataset, which is much worse than 5.1. I did not change any code.