-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 342
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
knn eval of MAE #6
Comments
have you tried the linear prob eval? |
Emm, how about end-to-end finetuning? |
I just tried your latest updata of end-to-end finetuning, it seems good. But I think linear prob still is a metric cannot avoided. |
Thanks for you suggestions, we actually ignore the linear prob metric. In fact, I am not very familiar with Linear Prob. Can you help me try to implement it? Thank you very much! |
https://github.com/facebookresearch/dino/blob/main/eval_linear.py |
Ok, thank you~ |
Hello, have you finished the end-to-end fine-tuning of vit-base/1600e? Can you tell me the result? Thank you! |
Hi, I finished the epoch 1600 training, but I only got fine-tuning result of 83.15 for epoch 1400 and 82.97 for epoch 1600. which is lower than your reported epoch 400 and the paper results. |
From your pretrained log of vit_base, I found your max learning rate is 0.0024, is you run with 128X32 batch size? |
Ok, that is very strange. I run vit-base with 512 x 8 = 4096, where the lr: 1.5e-4 * 512 * 8 / 256 = 0.0024. |
ok, I will try your setting to reimplement your results for epoch 400. But the results of epoch 1600 is on batchsize 4096, still not good enough. the ft accuracy incrase slowly with epoch: 82.71/200, 82.82/400,82.87/600, 83/800,82.78/1000,82.96/1200,83.15/1400,82.97/1600. |
OK, thank you for your so much experiments! |
@Dongshengjiang Have you tried the LinearProbe evaluation with cls token? The paper said: It seems that the author just adds a dummy token when pre-training, and directly uses it as the feature for linear probing. |
I eval vit_base of 500/1600 pretraining on imagenet1000 using knn metric. By loading all the pretained parameter with vit GAP method (not need cls token), the knn 20-NN result is 33.4 in imagenet100 dataset, which is very low and not match the accuracy of linear prob.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: