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
Hi,
I have trained self-supervised model on cifar10 with PreAct-ResNet18 and ResNet18. On the 90% noise rate, I achieve the performance about 93.46 with ResNet18, but get a worse result about 92.8 with PreAct-ResNet18. However, the performance with PreAct-ResNet18 in the paper is 93.57. And the available self-supervised model for cifar10 in Google Drive is ResNet18, I achieve the performance about 93.54 by using this model.
I notice that the performance with PreAct-ResNet18 in the paper is actually more similar to ResNet18. Is there any mistake? Or how can I reproduce the performance with PreAct-ResNet18?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hi,
I have trained self-supervised model on cifar10 with PreAct-ResNet18 and ResNet18. On the 90% noise rate, I achieve the performance about 93.46 with ResNet18, but get a worse result about 92.8 with PreAct-ResNet18. However, the performance with PreAct-ResNet18 in the paper is 93.57. And the available self-supervised model for cifar10 in Google Drive is ResNet18, I achieve the performance about 93.54 by using this model.
I notice that the performance with PreAct-ResNet18 in the paper is actually more similar to ResNet18. Is there any mistake? Or how can I reproduce the performance with PreAct-ResNet18?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: