You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
@ZikangZhou Hi, I followed the script provided in your readme file to reproduce the results, but encountered two issues.
Firstly, when I set the batch size to 4 on my 3090 GPU, I encountered out of memory problem.
So I adjusted the batch size to 2, while keeping the other hyperparameters unchanged.
The resulting reproduction shows that minade=0.732 and minfde=1.294, which has a small deviation from the results reported in the paper.
However, there is a significant difference from the pre-trained model that you uploaded, where minade=1.25.
I would like to ask if the hyperparameters or other training configurations of the pre-trained model in this version have been changed?
Thank you very much.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
No, I didn't change the hyperparameters except that I use different GPUs for training. As you have changed the batch size, I feel that such a degree of deviation in performance is acceptable.
@ZikangZhou Hi, I followed the script provided in your readme file to reproduce the results, but encountered two issues.
Firstly, when I set the batch size to 4 on my 3090 GPU, I encountered out of memory problem.
So I adjusted the batch size to 2, while keeping the other hyperparameters unchanged.
The resulting reproduction shows that minade=0.732 and minfde=1.294, which has a small deviation from the results reported in the paper.
However, there is a significant difference from the pre-trained model that you uploaded, where minade=1.25.
I would like to ask if the hyperparameters or other training configurations of the pre-trained model in this version have been changed?
Thank you very much.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: