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

could you provide the results and configuration only using one or two GPUs(A6000)? #28

Open
codwest opened this issue Oct 18, 2023 · 3 comments

Comments

@codwest
Copy link

codwest commented Oct 18, 2023

I am interested in your project. But I only have two A6000 GPUs, and I cannot reproduce the results reported in your paper. If you have time, could you try to train your model on the SBD and COCOLVIS datasets using one or two GPUs. If you could, could you let me know what the final results are and their configurations, especially the batch size value?
Another question is: What are the configurations of your Xtiny model if it is also trained using one GPU or two GPUs? what results?
I need your help.
thank you.

@qinliuliuqin
Copy link
Collaborator

@codwest Hi, thanks for your question. Training with fewer GPUs would not change the results significantly if the training epochs were similar. Could you provide your results? Are they substantially worse than those in the paper? As for the batch size, you just need to decrease it accordingly. For example, new_batch_size = new_#GPUs * (old_batch_size // old_#GPUs). Training the xTiny model is the same as training other models except for the batch size.

Feel free to let me know if you still have issues.

@codwest
Copy link
Author

codwest commented Oct 25, 2023

Thank you very much and give me a detailed explanation.
image
I trained your Xtiny model using one A6000 GPU with default parameters in your code. So, batch_size=32, num_epochs=1001. The final test result is:
image
Did you have a similar result? Could you provide your results and training configuration?

@qinliuliuqin
Copy link
Collaborator

@codwest The training curve looks normal, but the SBD results in the table are worse than I obtained. As reported in the paper, I obtained 4.71 and 7.09 on the SBD dataset for xTiny trained on C+L. However, I didn't record all the other results. BTW, can you reproduce the results in the paper using the released xTiny model?

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

2 participants