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

Few questions #1

Open
vishaal27 opened this issue Apr 6, 2023 · 1 comment
Open

Few questions #1

vishaal27 opened this issue Apr 6, 2023 · 1 comment

Comments

@vishaal27
Copy link

Very interesting work and great results in both training-free and training-required regimes. I had two questions:

  1. I was wondering about a random selection baseline -- how effective would that be by just randomly subsampling the feature selection indices without using APE. I see there are some ablations with PCA (which already are better than TIP-Adapter and TIP-X) so I was curious how well a random selection method would do?
  2. Do you have the optimal mixing hyperparameters for each dataset? I couldn't find it in the appendix.

Great work again!

@yangyangyang127
Copy link
Owner

yangyangyang127 commented Apr 7, 2023

Dear Sir,

  1. We implement a random selection baseline and a no-selection baseline for APE. The 1/2/4/8/16-shot results on ImageNet under ResNet-50 backbone are shown below:

No Selection: 62.07 62.27 65.54 62.70 63.03
Random: 62.03 62.10 62.26 62.44 62.72
APE: 62.04 62.34 62.54 62.79 63.42

The random selection and no-selection approaches are both worse than the proposed criterion.

  1. The optimal hyperparameters for most datasets are given in the code except for the oxford_pets dataset, where we adjust the number of selected channels for different shot numbers, 600/700/800/900 channels can be selected.

And thanks for your attention.

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

2 participants