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'm wondering why ablation study in paper doesn't give result of using L_Q loss only.If the result is obviously worse than using L_C only,it will demonstrate what a role that L_C is playing in this task.
Also,I'm also curious about why using a loss that forcely pull prediction points to predefined hash center,which is a singular point that is hard to converge to(and I know that part is talked in paper).I just want to know why create a such a loss function and how much the importance is.
Your reply will be highly appreciated.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hi,I'm wondering why ablation study in paper doesn't give result of using L_Q loss only.If the result is obviously worse than using L_C only,it will demonstrate what a role that L_C is playing in this task.
Also,I'm also curious about why using a loss that forcely pull prediction points to predefined hash center,which is a singular point that is hard to converge to(and I know that part is talked in paper).I just want to know why create a such a loss function and how much the importance is.
Your reply will be highly appreciated.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: