-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 157
New issue
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
Request for Kuramoto dataset #23
Comments
You can download our code for generating the Kuramoto dataset used in our
paper here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/3jwim0n7iijrz9w/kuramoto.zip?dl=0
…On Sat, May 9, 2020 at 5:02 AM Chen Siyuan ***@***.***> wrote:
According to Section 5.1 of the original paper, I use the code by Laszuk (
https://github.com/laszukdawid/Dynamical-systems/blob/master/kuramoto.py)
to simulate the Kuramoto model. The settings are listed as follows.
N = 5 # number of particles
intrinsic frequencies \omega uniformly sampled from [1, 10)
initial phases \phi uniformly sampled from [0, 2\pi)
coupling constants k_{ij} = 1 with probability 0.5
subsample factor = 10
length of trajectories T = 50
particle states x = (d\phi / dt, sin \phi, \omega)
For normalization, I use the function load_kuramoto_data from utils.py.
Some important settings of NRI are listed as follows.
encoder: CNN
decoder: MLP
skip_first = True
lr = 5e-4
prediction_step = 10 # teacher forcing in every 10-th time step
It seems I've strictly followed the settings of the original paper, but
the accuracy gets stucked at around 54%, and the mse gets stucked at the
level of 1e-1. There must be some mistakes in simulation or training. Do
you have any advice? Would you mind providing a copy of Kuramoto dataset to
help me out?
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#23>, or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABYBYYBU3BYOLKEZJOHIGO3RQTBTJANCNFSM4M4TNNMA>
.
|
Thank you! I'll try your code. |
Your code does help. But I haven't got comparable results when the number of objects is 10. Do you have any advice for data generation or model training to promote the performance? By the way, here are the brief results.
|
Have you tried setting `skip_first` to True?
…On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 11:21 AM Chen Siyuan ***@***.***> wrote:
Your code does help. But I haven't got comparable results when the number
of objects is 10. Do you have any advice for data generation or model
training to promote the performance? By the way, here are the brief results.
method acc (N=5) acc (N=10)
reported *96.0%* *75.7%*
reproduced 94.6% 67.6%
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#23 (comment)>, or
unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABYBYYBNO5V6LQ64YIFJ7WDRUYI3DANCNFSM4M4TNNMA>
.
|
Yeah, I set 'skip_first=True' as it makes a difference. I also set 'encoder=CNN'. Other settings are the same as described in the paper, and most of them are the default settings in the code. I wonder if I should try more training data. Maybe 50k is not be enough for 10-object system. |
According to Section 5.1 of the original paper, I use the code by Laszuk (https://github.com/laszukdawid/Dynamical-systems/blob/master/kuramoto.py) to simulate the Kuramoto model. The settings are listed as follows.
For normalization, I use the function
load_kuramoto_data
fromutils.py
.Some important settings of NRI are listed as follows.
It seems I've strictly followed the settings of the original paper, but the accuracy gets stucked at around 54%, and the mse gets stucked at the level of 1e-1. There must be some mistakes in simulation or training. Do you have any advice? Would you mind providing a copy of Kuramoto dataset to help me out?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: