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

question about test #9

Open
jinxxo-j opened this issue May 16, 2024 · 0 comments
Open

question about test #9

jinxxo-j opened this issue May 16, 2024 · 0 comments

Comments

@jinxxo-j
Copy link

jinxxo-j commented May 16, 2024

Hi, @Lu-Feng
Thanks you for an interesting research!

I have some question about cross image encoder.

from the question link below,
#7 (comment)

I think that cross image encoder could use prior knowledge(consecutiveness of queries) of test dataset

from supplemetary material (table 10),
there is an ablation study of cross-image encoder
the performance on pitts30k is written below,
No encoder : 90.6, 95.9, 97.2
Transformer encoder layer x 2(default) : 94.8, 97.4, 98.1

compare this performance of crica in the above link,

when test dataloader use shuffle=True,

2024-05-02 12:47:59   [0]: Recalls on < BaseDataset, pitts30k - #database: 10000; #queries: 6816 >: R@1: 92.2, R@5: 96.2, R@10: 97.2, R@100: 99.4
2024-05-02 12:49:38   [1]: Recalls on < BaseDataset, pitts30k - #database: 10000; #queries: 6816 >: R@1: 91.8, R@5: 96.1, R@10: 97.3, R@100: 99.4
2024-05-02 12:51:17   [2]: Recalls on < BaseDataset, pitts30k - #database: 10000; #queries: 6816 >: R@1: 92.0, R@5: 96.1, R@10: 97.2, R@100: 99.4
2024-05-02 12:52:57   [3]: Recalls on < BaseDataset, pitts30k - #database: 10000; #queries: 6816 >: R@1: 91.9, R@5: 96.1, R@10: 97.3, R@100: 99.4
2024-05-02 12:54:37   [4]: Recalls on < BaseDataset, pitts30k - #database: 10000; #queries: 6816 >: R@1: 92.0, R@5: 96.0, R@10: 97.3, R@100: 99.4
2024-05-02 12:56:28   [5]: Recalls on < BaseDataset, pitts30k - #database: 10000; #queries: 6816 >: R@1: 92.1, R@5: 96.0, R@10: 97.3, R@100: 99.3
2024-05-02 12:58:21   [6]: Recalls on < BaseDataset, pitts30k - #database: 10000; #queries: 6816 >: R@1: 92.1, R@5: 96.0, R@10: 97.3, R@100: 99.4
2024-05-02 13:00:23   [7]: Recalls on < BaseDataset, pitts30k - #database: 10000; #queries: 6816 >: R@1: 92.1, R@5: 96.2, R@10: 97.2, R@100: 99.4
2024-05-02 13:02:23   [8]: Recalls on < BaseDataset, pitts30k - #database: 10000; #queries: 6816 >: R@1: 91.9, R@5: 95.9, R@10: 97.2, R@100: 99.4
2024-05-02 13:04:21   [9]: Recalls on < BaseDataset, pitts30k - #database: 10000; #queries: 6816 >: R@1: 92.0, R@5: 95.9, R@10: 97.2, R@100: 99.3
2024-05-02 13:04:21   Average recall on < BaseDataset, pitts30k - #database: 10000; #queries: 6816 >: 91.99090375586854

it seems cross image encoder seems to have less impact when test dataloader shuffle=True.
and i think that this issue should be solved .

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