We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Hello and thank you for this great paper and implementation.
I've run your method with a dummy example:
fake_features = torch.ones((1024, 4096)) real_features = torch.ones((1024, 4096))
and would expect 1.0 for both density and coverage but actually got 0.0
There are two changes to the Density metric that might help
(distance_real_fake < np.expand_dims(real_nearest_neighbour_distances, axis=1)
(distance_real_fake <= np.expand_dims(real_nearest_neighbour_distances, axis=1)
(distance_real_fake <= real_nearest_neighbour_distances.unsqueeze(1)).sum(dim=0)
(distance_real_fake <= real_nearest_neighbour_distances.unsqueeze(1)).sum(dim=0).clamp(0, self.nearest_k)
Is it make sense or do I miss something?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
No branches or pull requests
Hello and thank you for this great paper and implementation.
I've run your method with a dummy example:
and would expect 1.0 for both density and coverage but actually got 0.0
There are two changes to the Density metric that might help
(distance_real_fake < np.expand_dims(real_nearest_neighbour_distances, axis=1)
=>
(distance_real_fake <= np.expand_dims(real_nearest_neighbour_distances, axis=1)
(distance_real_fake <= real_nearest_neighbour_distances.unsqueeze(1)).sum(dim=0)
=>(distance_real_fake <= real_nearest_neighbour_distances.unsqueeze(1)).sum(dim=0).clamp(0, self.nearest_k)
Is it make sense or do I miss something?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: