-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 16
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
About the Results in the paper. #1
Comments
I just now updated the data in the github repo by adding the 4 options version of data I previously used. Let me whether you can replicate the numbers in my paper using this version of data. Thanks! |
I tried running the
|
Me too. I also tried TW dataset and I got about 31% when the topn is 15. |
hmmm, this code was written a year ago and I tried my best to release the old code here without running and verifying. Thanks for helping me find out the issue here. I am gonna check on my side the source of performance discrepancy but it may be finished after 5/17 which is the conference ddl I am now busy with. I am so sorry for the slow process. Thank you for your great patience. |
@jind11, did you get a chance to solve the issue? And is it possible for you to release the reader model as well? |
@jind11 What is the status on reproducing the results? Are you 100% the dataset is correct? Great work by the way, that's a very nice dataset you have built here! |
I rerun the code in the IR repo. However, I just get the result 22%, which is far lower than the 34% in the paper for USMLE. Is there any other setting for the IR method?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: