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
Hello. First of all, thank you for sharing code and experiment results.
Reading the code, I found that the model will use fast weights to infer. According to LookAhead, fast weights (before synchronization) may perform worse than slow weights. By chance of (1-1/k) probability (80% when k=5), we will use unsynchronized fast weights to validate/test. Therefore, it should be better if we manually synchronize before evaluation.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hi @qbx2 ,
Thanks for the feedback!
I think adding a manual sync is a good idea, along with a manual clear weights (for restarting new training).
I will try and add that later this week!
Thanks
Less
Hello. First of all, thank you for sharing code and experiment results.
Reading the code, I found that the model will use fast weights to infer. According to LookAhead, fast weights (before synchronization) may perform worse than slow weights. By chance of (1-1/k) probability (80% when k=5), we will use unsynchronized fast weights to validate/test. Therefore, it should be better if we manually synchronize before evaluation.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: