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

MNIST without training the weights #7

Open
zengqg opened this issue Oct 18, 2019 · 3 comments
Open

MNIST without training the weights #7

zengqg opened this issue Oct 18, 2019 · 3 comments

Comments

@zengqg
Copy link

zengqg commented Oct 18, 2019

Is the code

"python model.py mnist256test -e 1"

performed to test WANN on MNIST without training the weights?

But I just get an accuracy of 0.0568.

@agaier
Copy link
Collaborator

agaier commented Oct 18, 2019

Are you sure everything is setup right? When I call this in the WANN_tool directory I get

image

But that command is to use the trained weights. If you are interested in untrained weights, you could use the sweep command to look at accuracies of different single values:

image

So even with a single weight of 0 you should be getting 18%

@zengqg
Copy link
Author

zengqg commented Oct 19, 2019

I run the code:
result1

To my knowledge, this code will load the model the weights from "champions/mnist.out".
If adding the arugment -f zoo/mnist256.wann.json, it will load the weights from "zoo/mnist256.wann.json".
So, what is the difference between the weights from the out file and json file?

After reading your response, I also try:
result2
which means the models architecture with or without adding"-f zoo/mnist256.wann.json" is the same, the only difference is the weights.
Therefore, could you tell me why the result of using the weights from "champions/mnist.out" is so bad?

@agaier
Copy link
Collaborator

agaier commented Oct 20, 2019

"champions/mnist.out" is only the topology, in a giant square weight matrix. every weight is set to 0. Well...almost. it looks like the initial weights were still set, though they are normally rewritten before evaluation (every non-nan weight is set to the shared weight). This is why it is so bad, being a bit worse than chance, it looks like an almost completely inactive ANN -- except for a couple pixels that are still hooked up to the output layer.

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