We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
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
Hi, I would like to ask you some question about training details. (1) Does your training dataset downloaded from the link : http://mftp.mmcheng.net/liuyun/rcf/data/bsds_pascal_train_pair.lst and http://mftp.mmcheng.net/liuyun/rcf/data/HED-BSDS.tar.gz, or simply from the link: https://www2.eecs.berkeley.edu/Research/Projects/CS/vision/grouping/resources.html. (2) Dose you alter the hyper-parameters of original PyTorch implementation https://github.com/meteorshowers/RCF-pytorch/. When I used the orignal PyTorch implementation , the final F score (0.755) is pretty lower than they reported (0.808), and I do not know why. Look forward to your reply
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
No branches or pull requests
Hi, I would like to ask you some question about training details.
(1) Does your training dataset downloaded from the link : http://mftp.mmcheng.net/liuyun/rcf/data/bsds_pascal_train_pair.lst and http://mftp.mmcheng.net/liuyun/rcf/data/HED-BSDS.tar.gz, or simply from the link: https://www2.eecs.berkeley.edu/Research/Projects/CS/vision/grouping/resources.html.
(2) Dose you alter the hyper-parameters of original PyTorch implementation https://github.com/meteorshowers/RCF-pytorch/. When I used the orignal PyTorch implementation , the final F score (0.755) is pretty lower than they reported (0.808), and I do not know why.
Look forward to your reply
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: