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

Regarding Flop and Parameter count in NASBench201 cifar10 dataset #134

Open
alpemreacar opened this issue Aug 29, 2023 · 0 comments
Open

Comments

@alpemreacar
Copy link

Hi,

I have question regarding flop and param numbers in NASBench201 database.

Which Algorithm
I am looking at NASBench201 database (https://github.com/D-X-Y/AutoDL-Projects/blob/main/docs/NAS-Bench-201.md#how-to-use-nas-bench-201), cifar10 dataset. I am using recommended checkpoint (NAS-Bench-201-v1_1-096897.pth)

Describe the Question
I queried the following two architectures,

  • |skip_connect~0|+|avg_pool_3x3~0|nor_conv_3x3~1|+|nor_conv_3x3~0|none~1|avg_pool_3x3~2|
  • |skip_connect~0|+|avg_pool_3x3~0|nor_conv_3x3~1|+|nor_conv_3x3~0|avg_pool_3x3~1|none~2|

Note that the architectures differ only by two paths where the module from node 1 to node 3 is changed by the module from node 2 to node 3. We would not expect the number of parameters to be different in this case as such the swapped modules are parameter-free. Since the dimensions are the same, the flop counts should be the same as well.

However, I am getting different parameter and flop counts for the above two architectures in my queries. For instance, the number of parameters are 0.48M and 0.56M respectively. I could not understand the reason of it.

Could you help me with this? Is my understanding correct?

@alpemreacar alpemreacar changed the title Flop and Parameter count in NASBench201 cifar10 dataset Regarding Flop and Parameter count in NASBench201 cifar10 dataset Aug 29, 2023
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

1 participant