Commit 119cd7e8 authored by Tediloma's avatar Tediloma
Browse files

paper ver 3.1

parent 41f22613
This is pdfTeX, Version 3.141592653-2.6-1.40.22 (MiKTeX 21.6) (preloaded format=pdflatex 2021.7.25) 30 JUL 2021 23:44 This is pdfTeX, Version 3.141592653-2.6-1.40.22 (MiKTeX 21.6) (preloaded format=pdflatex 2021.7.25) 30 JUL 2021 23:50
entering extended mode entering extended mode
**./paper_working_design.tex **./paper_working_design.tex
(paper_working_design.tex (paper_working_design.tex
...@@ -389,7 +389,7 @@ Package pdftex.def Info: Architektur6.png used on input line 77. ...@@ -389,7 +389,7 @@ Package pdftex.def Info: Architektur6.png used on input line 77.
] [2 <./Architektur6.png>] ] [2 <./Architektur6.png>]
Underfull \vbox (badness 1990) has occurred while \output is active [] Underfull \vbox (badness 10000) has occurred while \output is active []
[3] [3]
(paper_working_design.bbl [4] (paper_working_design.bbl [4]
...@@ -435,7 +435,7 @@ public/amsfonts/cm/cmsy10.pfb><K:/Programme/MiKTeX/fonts/type1/urw/courier/ucrr ...@@ -435,7 +435,7 @@ public/amsfonts/cm/cmsy10.pfb><K:/Programme/MiKTeX/fonts/type1/urw/courier/ucrr
8a.pfb><K:/Programme/MiKTeX/fonts/type1/urw/times/utmb8a.pfb><K:/Programme/MiKT 8a.pfb><K:/Programme/MiKTeX/fonts/type1/urw/times/utmb8a.pfb><K:/Programme/MiKT
eX/fonts/type1/urw/times/utmr8a.pfb><K:/Programme/MiKTeX/fonts/type1/urw/times/ eX/fonts/type1/urw/times/utmr8a.pfb><K:/Programme/MiKTeX/fonts/type1/urw/times/
utmri8a.pfb> utmri8a.pfb>
Output written on paper_working_design.pdf (5 pages, 347961 bytes). Output written on paper_working_design.pdf (5 pages, 347966 bytes).
PDF statistics: PDF statistics:
140 PDF objects out of 1000 (max. 8388607) 140 PDF objects out of 1000 (max. 8388607)
40 named destinations out of 1000 (max. 500000) 40 named destinations out of 1000 (max. 500000)
......
...@@ -180,9 +180,7 @@ We test the performance in two scenarios for each augmentation method: In the ZS ...@@ -180,9 +180,7 @@ We test the performance in two scenarios for each augmentation method: In the ZS
\noindent All our results are generated following the procedure described in the experiments section. For the multiple labels approach three manually created labels per class are used. The automatic augmentation approach utilizes five labels: one manually created label and four augmented versions. In table \ref{tab:ZSL_GZSL} one can see the ZSL, seen and unseen accuracies, as well as the harmonic mean. Table \ref{tab:top1_top5} displays a more detailed view of the achieved unseen accuracies. It shows the top-1 and top-5 accuracies for our approaches with their standard deviations (std) over the eight splits. \noindent All our results are generated following the procedure described in the experiments section. For the multiple labels approach three manually created labels per class are used. The automatic augmentation approach utilizes five labels: one manually created label and four augmented versions. In table \ref{tab:ZSL_GZSL} one can see the ZSL, seen and unseen accuracies, as well as the harmonic mean. Table \ref{tab:top1_top5} displays a more detailed view of the achieved unseen accuracies. It shows the top-1 and top-5 accuracies for our approaches with their standard deviations (std) over the eight splits.
Improvements on the ZSL accuracy, the unseen accuracy and the harmonic mean are achieved using the descriptive labels. The accuracies increase even further with the multiple labels approach. Improvements on the ZSL accuracy, the unseen accuracy and the harmonic mean are achieved using the descriptive labels. The accuracies increase even further with the multiple labels approach. Using automatic augmentation performs worse compared to multiple manually created labels, but it still constitutes a relative 23\% increase over using only one descriptive label.
Using automatic augmentation performs worse compared to multiple manually created labels, but it still constitutes a relative 23\% increase over using only one descriptive label.
The seen accuracy stays within the same range, only experiencing a marginal increase for the two cases that use multiple labels. This behaviour along with a decrease in unseen accuracy is observed whenever batch normalization is applied to any of our approaches. Therefore it is only applied in the cases where multiple labels are used because they require batch normalization in order for the training to converge. The seen accuracy stays within the same range, only experiencing a marginal increase for the two cases that use multiple labels. This behaviour along with a decrease in unseen accuracy is observed whenever batch normalization is applied to any of our approaches. Therefore it is only applied in the cases where multiple labels are used because they require batch normalization in order for the training to converge.
......
Markdown is supported
0% or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment