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

code comment is misleading #3

Open
dwSun opened this issue Apr 18, 2018 · 2 comments
Open

code comment is misleading #3

dwSun opened this issue Apr 18, 2018 · 2 comments

Comments

@dwSun
Copy link

dwSun commented Apr 18, 2018

(6, 64, 4, 1), # 32x28x28 -> 64x28x28

please fix this code, according to 1801.04381 v3.

misunderstood you code (T_T)

@liangfu
Copy link
Owner

liangfu commented Apr 19, 2018

The comment only shows size of input and output of an inverted residual block, and the tensor sizes that has been used internally inside the block are not illustrated in the comment.
Take the line you highlighted for example, the input size for the block is 32x28x28, and an inverted residual block would use expansion layer to increase the tensor size to 192x28x28, then it would be reduced to 64x28x28 at output layer of the inverted residual block.

@liangfu
Copy link
Owner

liangfu commented Apr 20, 2018

I think the paper I got on my hand is the version that is published in January, there is a small mistake in the illustration of stride size. But when I look into the version that is published in April, it becomes more clear to me, the code comment is some what misleading. I would fix this as soon as possible. Thanks for reminding.

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

2 participants