Skip to content

Internal Imagenet normalisation for pretrained squeezenet models #785

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

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

Internal Imagenet normalisation for pretrained squeezenet models #785

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

ekagra-ranjan
Copy link
Contributor

Makes it easier to normalise the model weights with imagenet mean and std when using transfer learning. Useful for beginners who forget to normalise the input images while using transfer learning.

Makes it easier to normalise the model weights with imagenet mean and std when using transfer learning. Useful for beginners who forget to normalise the input images while using transfer learning.
@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented Mar 8, 2019

Codecov Report

Merging #785 into master will decrease coverage by 0.07%.
The diff coverage is 14.28%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #785      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   38.13%   38.05%   -0.08%     
==========================================
  Files          32       32              
  Lines        3126     3132       +6     
  Branches      487      488       +1     
==========================================
  Hits         1192     1192              
- Misses       1855     1861       +6     
  Partials       79       79
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
torchvision/models/squeezenet.py 24.56% <14.28%> (-2.89%) ⬇️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 9d9f48a...d0c3585. Read the comment docs.

@fmassa
Copy link
Member

fmassa commented Mar 9, 2019

Same comment from #782 (comment) applies

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants