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
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.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
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?
@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. :)
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.
(https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-CycleGAN-and-DiscoGAN-They-both-seem-to-be-the-same-thing)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: