-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 346
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
experiment result #7
Comments
me too. A huge gap between my experiment and the author's report. |
@MrLinNing Do you get the experiment result closed to the author's result? |
I just ran an experiment on CIFAR-10, with the student being a simple LeNet-5 like network (64C - MP - 128C - MP - 400FC-10), and the teacher is a deeper version (128C-128C-MP-128C-128C-MP-128C-128C-512FC-10). The teacher gets to ~93% accuracy, the student without KL is ~86.5%. With KL, the student gets to 87.5% consistently. I didn't use this repo code, only copied the KL loss function to my code. |
I found a 10% gap too, 84% nowhere near the expected 94.788% . Student net: Resnet-18, Teacher net: Resnext29. Parameters are the same with @peterliht 's original settings. |
I also got similar results. |
Looking through another thread of issue discussions on the data loader, the accuracy inconsistency might be due to the way how student and teacher models got their data when we used shuffling. |
Has anyone used pytorch 0.3 to run and test? |
@peterliht why would you want to use Pytorch 0.3? The current stable version is 1.2. @wnma3mz @xiaowenmasfather Resnet-18 should get to 94.0% without any teachers. If that's not the case, then you're doing something wrong. |
I understand there is newer (and more stable) version of pytorch available. I just wanted to understand if people have seen different results across different pytorch versions. When first creating this repo 2 years ago, as specified in requirements.txt, v0.3 was used. I want to get a better understanding of issues that have prevented people from reproducing results and see if fixes can be done along with the most stable pytorch version. |
Hi @peterliht |
@peterliht |
I met the same problem of accuracy gap. I have tried adjusting the learning rate to a small one and observed an improvement, making my results close to those of Peterliht. You can try changing the learning rate and running the code again. |
Your request (#17) fix the problem and I am getting much improved result. I wonder why it is not merged into the master yet! |
FYI, with the pull request #17, I was able to get accuracy 95.19% on reset18 with the resnext29 teacher. |
Hello peterliht,
I ran through your code according to the instructions, did not modify any parameters, but found that the results vary greatly.
What parameters did you modify before releasing the code?
The following experimental results on resnet18:
python train.py --model_dir experiments/resnet18_distill/resnext_teacher
My experimental environment is:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: