Skip to content
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

differences between cyclegan and discogan #1

Open
nashory opened this issue Sep 14, 2017 · 3 comments
Open

differences between cyclegan and discogan #1

nashory opened this issue Sep 14, 2017 · 3 comments

Comments

@nashory
Copy link
Owner

nashory commented Sep 14, 2017

(https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-CycleGAN-and-DiscoGAN-They-both-seem-to-be-the-same-thing)

  • CycleGAN has a single cycle-consistency loss. Also, when comparing F(G(y)) with y, it seems that the two papers use different forms of distance measures (MSE, hinge-loss).
  • CycleGan has an addition hyperparameter to adjust the contribution of reconstruction/cycle-consistency loss in the overall loss function.
  • the generator structures used in DiscoGan and CycleGan are somewhat different.
@Yash-5
Copy link

Yash-5 commented Oct 6, 2017

CycleGAN has a single cycle-consistency loss.

Hey, about the first point, isn't the single cycle-consistency loss defined as a sum of the two forward cycle-consistent loss and backward cycle-consistent loss just as in DiscoGAN?

@nashory
Copy link
Owner Author

nashory commented Oct 6, 2017

@yash2208 yes, exactly. cyclegan uses one cycle-consistency losses by adding up the losses from each domain transfer generator (Gab + Gba) with multiplication of scale factor gamma (10 in the paper.), while DIscoGAN uses each losses respectively without summation.
I found this difference is very tirivial, though. :)

@doantientai
Copy link

The differences between 2 papers seem not enough to split them into 2 papers. I think they were submitted at quite the same time so they both got published. However, CycleGAN seems got more attention.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants