[go: nahoru, domu]

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

Spikemp #3

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Aug 25, 2016
Merged

Spikemp #3

merged 6 commits into from
Aug 25, 2016

Conversation

duguyue100
Copy link
Collaborator
  • Fix max pooling: dragged max pooling operation out of online-normalization scope

@duguyue100 duguyue100 merged commit 6809f07 into master Aug 25, 2016
self.max_spikerate.set_value(0.0)
self.v_thresh.set_value(settings['v_thresh'])
else:
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@duguyue100 This else was not here before. I removed it.

@duguyue100
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@rbodo the elses are intentional to keep the spikecounts for avg_max mode. If removed, avg_max couldn't function correctly.

@rbodo
Copy link
Contributor
rbodo commented Aug 25, 2016

Yes, but it should be decoupled from 'online_normalization' in the if-else statement. We don't want this object to be created by default because it costs lots of memory, but only if the networks uses MaxPooling layers. For now I put it in the if-clause for MaxPool layers. But then it is also created for every conv layer even if we use Avg pooling. We could add a flag to the network description has_MaxPool==True or similar.
I guess for now it's OK, we can worry about performance later.

@duguyue100
Copy link
Collaborator Author

In your last commit, if online_normalization is true, then the spikecounts will be updated twice in update and reset. I'm gonna keep this else on my branch first, and I will figure out a smarter way of updating avg_spikerate instead.

@rbodo
Copy link
Contributor
rbodo commented Aug 25, 2016

That's true, thanks for pointing it out. Please push your version to master then.

@rbodo
Copy link
Contributor
rbodo commented Aug 25, 2016

Never-mind, I just changed it.

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants