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,
Thank you very much for your work, that really helps me a lot. I have noticed that the batch normalization function didn't work very well in my models: with batch normalization it will be trained slower and converge at the wrong point. But we I substitute the 'gamma' and 'beta's <truncated_normal_initializer> with <zeros/ones_initializer>, your batch normalization module works very well and converges at the right point. As I am a tensorflow beginner, I don't understand well the differences it brings. Could you please explain to me why you choose these initializers and why they bring such a difference? Thank you very much!
Best wishes,
J. SHI
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
@JingleiSHI Actually, I have no particular reason for using truncated normal distribution. I not sure why your model doesn't work (zeros/ones initializer are used in tf.layers.batch_normalization).
Hello,
Thank you very much for your work, that really helps me a lot. I have noticed that the batch normalization function didn't work very well in my models: with batch normalization it will be trained slower and converge at the wrong point. But we I substitute the 'gamma' and 'beta's <truncated_normal_initializer> with <zeros/ones_initializer>, your batch normalization module works very well and converges at the right point. As I am a tensorflow beginner, I don't understand well the differences it brings. Could you please explain to me why you choose these initializers and why they bring such a difference? Thank you very much!
Best wishes,
J. SHI
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: