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

Stochastic optimization #19

Open
VolkerH opened this issue Jun 29, 2020 · 1 comment
Open

Stochastic optimization #19

VolkerH opened this issue Jun 29, 2020 · 1 comment

Comments

@VolkerH
Copy link

VolkerH commented Jun 29, 2020

Hi, I've finally got some time to play with this on a GPU today.
I have some issues with the stochastic optimization which you are already are aware of and mention in the demo:

         print("NOTE: if you get a bad results for ssi, blame stochastic optimisation and retry...")
         print("      The training is done on the same exact image that we infer on, very few pixels...")
         print("      Training should be more stable given more data...") 

I tried demo2d once and got weird artefacts (that almost looked like QR codes).
I tried again, with different artefacts (stripes).
And again, different artefacts (ghost images).
On the fourth attempt I finally got a result where I thought "hey, this can actually produce useful output similar to what I see mentioned in the paper".
So if you have any further suggestions to increase reproducability and converge to the same minimum that would be great.

I should heed the advice and try and train on more pixels, but I need to dive a bit deeper into the code for that.
Maybe that will be enough solve the issue.

But maybe there are some other strategies that can help not getting these artefacts?
Maybe some regularizer, some changes to the cost function, perhaps something that punishes the appearence of spikes in the FFT (e.g. unwanted periodic patterns that I have seen in many runs) ?

Here are the results of several different runs all on the same demo image with exactly the same parameters:

ssi_varying_results

Maybe there is something I am doing wrong.
I checked whether there is any variation in the artificially generated noisy input image, but it was always the same starting point.

@VolkerH
Copy link
Author

VolkerH commented Aug 17, 2020

Just bumping this issue in case it was missed.

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

1 participant