You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on May 28, 2024. It is now read-only.
the logdet is divided by n_parts (usually 2).
Why the logdet is divided by 2 at SelectNode?
Question 2:
Why the likelihood contributed by different scales is computed in the following way?
Here
lp2 is computed as the likelihood contributed by the last scale.
But I have checked the formula (3) in the paper 'Understanding Anomaly Detection with Deep Invertible Networks through Hierarchies of Distributions and Features'.
The likelihoods contributed by different scales are not equal to the implementation.
Can somebody explain this?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
I have two questions about the likelihood part.
Question 1:
In graph.py,
hierarchical_anomaly_detection/invglow/invertible/graph.py
Line 222 in ca2f1d8
the logdet is divided by n_parts (usually 2).
Why the logdet is divided by 2 at SelectNode?
Question 2:
Why the likelihood contributed by different scales is computed in the following way?
Here
hierarchical_anomaly_detection/invglow/evaluate.py
Line 38 in ca2f1d8
lp0 is computed as the likelihood contributed by the first scale.
and here
hierarchical_anomaly_detection/invglow/evaluate.py
Line 41 in ca2f1d8
lp2 is computed as the likelihood contributed by the last scale.
But I have checked the formula (3) in the paper 'Understanding Anomaly Detection with Deep Invertible Networks through Hierarchies of Distributions and Features'.
The likelihoods contributed by different scales are not equal to the implementation.
Can somebody explain this?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: