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

Not clear in the difference between the two latent spaces predicted #85

Open
arnabsinha99 opened this issue Jun 17, 2020 · 5 comments
Open

Comments

@arnabsinha99
Copy link

Note that the encoder E here is producing a point estimate for z', whereas the encoder in the previous section was predicting a Gaussian distribution.

I could not clearly understand what is the difference between the two latent z's being predicted. Both are trying to close to a normal distribution so both of them should be giving a point estimate as an output. @junyanz Sir, kindly correct me if I am wrong in my understanding. It would help me understand this wonderful paper even better. Thanks in advance :-)

@junyanz
Copy link
Owner

junyanz commented Jun 17, 2020

There are two choices: (1) predicts a vector z (2) predicts the mean and variance of multi-variate Gaussian, and sample the latent vector using the predicted mean/variance., as done in Eqn 10 of the VAE paper.

@arnabsinha99
Copy link
Author

Thank you for the paper reference. I shall refer to it. Further, I have a few questions.

  1. So the first choice pertains to cVAE-GAN and the second choice pertains to the cLR-GAN right?
  2. Implicitly, both the methods attempting to predict the latent space are trying to fit into a Gaussian distribution, so what is the difference behind both the methods applied, if you could illustrate with a small example?
  3. In cLR-GAN, when does the sampling from the predicted z take place? This is because after predicting the means and variances, it seems that we directly compare the N(0,1) and z with L1 loss.

@arnabsinha99
Copy link
Author

There are two choices: (1) predicts a vector z (2) predicts the mean and variance of multi-variate Gaussian, and sample the latent vector using the predicted mean/variance., as done in Eqn 10 of the VAE paper.

Does this mean that the cLR-GAN is trying to predict only one value of mean and variance for the entire multivariate latent space of |z| dimensions?

@junyanz
Copy link
Owner

junyanz commented Jun 21, 2020

For your question 1 and 3: (1) predict a single vector for cLR-GAN and (2) predict Gaussian mean/variance for cVAE-GAN. In cLR-GAN, we calculate the L1 loss between the sampled z and predicted z.

For your question 2. The difference is that in (1) we try to match a particular vector, while in (2), we try to match the Gaussian distribution.

@yangxiufengsia
Copy link

yangxiufengsia commented Apr 11, 2021

For your question 2. The difference is that in (1) we try to match a particular vector, while in (2), we try to match the Gaussian distribution.

Hi, I also have the same question with @arnabsinha99
you try to use l1 loss to minimize the encoded z (actually is mean) with the normal gaussian z_real. Why optimizing this could help improve the performance? did you compare bicycleGAN to CVAE-GAN with adding same l1 loss (loss between encoded mean with real_z) ? and what is the difference?

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

3 participants