Hi Sungyub Kim,
Thanks for the great implementation.
I have a question about your code here:
|
train_loss, train_acc, train_grad = train(args, model, train_loader) |
|
valid_loss, valid_acc = valid(args, model, valid_loader) |
|
test_loss, test_acc = valid(args, model, test_loader) |
Here, you are first training on all the batches in the meta-train set, then you are doing validation and testing.
However, the original algorithm seems to record the testing accuracy after training on every batch of tasks in the meta-train set. Do you observe the difference? I know it is a matter of implementation, we could have done the testing simultaneously, but as a matter of keeping consistent with the original implementation and the way others report their accuracy, would it make sense to observe the testing accuracy immediately after training on 1 meta-batch?
Thanks
Hi Sungyub Kim,
Thanks for the great implementation.
I have a question about your code here:
GBML/main.py
Lines 69 to 71 in 1577e17
Here, you are first training on all the batches in the meta-train set, then you are doing validation and testing.
However, the original algorithm seems to record the testing accuracy after training on every batch of tasks in the meta-train set. Do you observe the difference? I know it is a matter of implementation, we could have done the testing simultaneously, but as a matter of keeping consistent with the original implementation and the way others report their accuracy, would it make sense to observe the testing accuracy immediately after training on 1 meta-batch?
Thanks