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

FID results of GPT-L and GPT-1B on 256*256 images #46

Open
LutingWang opened this issue Jul 19, 2024 · 3 comments
Open

FID results of GPT-L and GPT-1B on 256*256 images #46

LutingWang opened this issue Jul 19, 2024 · 3 comments

Comments

@LutingWang
Copy link

LutingWang commented Jul 19, 2024

Hi, thanks for the excellent work. I'm trying to reproduce the results on 256*256 images. The VQGAN model is reproduced successively, achieving $2.10$ rFID. However, the AR part experiences a significant performance gap. More specifically, I use 8 A100-80G GPU to run the following scripts

bash scripts/autoregressive/train_c2i.sh --cloud-save-path xxx --code-path xxx --gpt-model GPT-L --epochs 50
bash scripts/autoregressive/train_c2i.sh --cloud-save-path xxx --code-path xxx --gpt-model GPT-1B --epochs 50

The training results are as follows

Model Final Loss FID Expected FID
GPT-L 7.86 4.62 4.22
GPT-1B 7.33 4.13 3.09

Is the final loss reasonable? Do you have any idea what the reason might be?

Thanks!

@PeizeSun
Copy link
Collaborator

Hi~
I don’t understand what is reproducing the result on 224x224. The expected FID is in 256x256.

@LutingWang LutingWang changed the title FID results of GPT-L and GPT-1B on 224*224 images FID results of GPT-L and GPT-1B on 256*256 images Jul 23, 2024
@LutingWang
Copy link
Author

Hi~ I don’t understand what is reproducing the result on 224x224. The expected FID is in 256x256.

Sorry for the mistake. I was trying to emphasize that the image resolution is not 384x384, but I mistakenly wrote 224.

@msed-Ebrahimi
Copy link

Hi~ I don’t understand what is reproducing the result on 224x224. The expected FID is in 256x256.

Hi. Thank you for this awesome repo. I have the same issue with the original code that the loss ends around 7.3 after 300 epochs.
IMG_0379

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

3 participants