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
In your paper, you mentioned that when calculating Paco-loss for sample xi, the learnable centers cj,j=1...m, are alsoincluded as positive/negative samples, besides, the centers seen as positive samples share a different weight compared to other positive samples which are data samples not centers.
However, I checked the codes of GPaco and Paco, finding no use of centers in PacoLoss.
When reproducing your work, I find taking centers into consideration even badly hurts the model performance.
Could you tell the reason? I am quite bothered by this issue.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Thanks for your reply!
I find there is a small error in 'MOCO/builder.py', when initialized momentum queue, the code is 'nn.functional.normalize(self.queue, dim=0)', however the dim should = 1. In 'Moco' code, dim=0 for queue.shape=[feat_dim, K], in your code, queue.shape=[K, feat_dim], so dim should =1, but I think it doesn't matter actually:)
In your paper, you mentioned that when calculating Paco-loss for sample xi, the learnable centers cj,j=1...m, are also included as positive/negative samples, besides, the centers seen as positive samples share a different weight compared to other positive samples which are data samples not centers.
However, I checked the codes of GPaco and Paco, finding no use of centers in PacoLoss.
When reproducing your work, I find taking centers into consideration even badly hurts the model performance.
Could you tell the reason? I am quite bothered by this issue.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: