-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 150
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
batch normalization layer #2
Comments
@LeonJWH MXNet does not store information about "moving_mean" and "moving_variance" in the json file. Please ask this question at MXNet repo for more information. Thanks! |
Have you merged "moving_mean" and "moving_variance" params into "gamma" and "beta"? |
@LeonJWH No, we didn't merge them into any other params. ( see: forward code ) You can get these raw values by |
ok, fine, i'll check it out soon, thx |
@cypw how did you do batch normalization refine after training? Do you have plan to release this code? |
We refined the batch normalization layers as suggested by [1]. In [1], the authors refine the BN layers by computing the average (not moving average) on a sufficiently large training batch after the training procedure ( see: ResNet ). It does require some coding. To make things easier, in our implementation, we freeze all layers except the BN layers and refine the params in BN layers for one epoch. We use the refined moving values as the final result. I am not sure which strategy is better, but our implementation does not require coding. -------- |
Great idea! top1 accuracy is improved after this procedure? about 1%? |
=_=!! Nope, It only improved the Top-5 by about 0.03%. Besides, it has some negative effect on Top-1 accuracy. ( Actually, the original Top-1 accuracy is a little bit higher than the released accuracy. ) |
Ok, thanks! I will try this step on resnext. |
I noticed that in model json files, there are not "moving_mean" and "moving_variance" in BatchNorm layers. Can you explain why? Thx.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: