-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 185
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
filter_num in TransUNet #36
Comments
If you do this on GPUs, then a possible reason is that your configuration is too big. |
The problem is that I go from |
Have you been able to reproduce this issue? |
@parniash Would you mind sharing your code? I don't think the network would get bigger. |
If you compile these two models (
vs
The last one has more parameters. I don't understand why. |
If I plug in: Model 1: So your second configuration is smaller, there is no problem. I feel that you are commenting on the number of trainable parameters---the second one has more trainable params, because its output head is connected to 64 channels. Try dig into your configurations with |
Hi,
In TransUNet,
filter_num
shows the number of filters for down and upsampling levels, right? However, If I use 3 filtersfilter_num=[64, 128, 128]
instead of the defaultfilter_num=[64, 128, 128, 512]
, the number of parameters of the network increases, and I get an OOM error. Is this a bug or am I missing something?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: