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

Data augmentations/mixup for pseudolabeling #141

Open
mbazzani opened this issue Aug 7, 2023 · 2 comments · May be fixed by #138
Open

Data augmentations/mixup for pseudolabeling #141

mbazzani opened this issue Aug 7, 2023 · 2 comments · May be fixed by #138

Comments

@mbazzani
Copy link
Contributor

mbazzani commented Aug 7, 2023

Should we use data augmentations/ mixup for finetuning on pseudolabels? I think data augs should be significantly less aggressive for the pseudolabeling. However, do we want that to mean a different set of augs, weaker augs, no augs, or something else entirely?

@benjamin-cates
Copy link
Contributor

For generating pseudo-labels, I think we should just run it without augs to get an accurate confidence value. For training on it, I think we should always data aug on stuff we're training on.

@mbazzani
Copy link
Contributor Author

mbazzani commented Aug 8, 2023

@Sean1572 @sprestrelski Thoughts on which data augs to use for finetuning?

Based on slack messages data augs seem very necessary

@mbazzani mbazzani linked a pull request Aug 8, 2023 that will close this issue
@mbazzani mbazzani linked a pull request Aug 8, 2023 that will close this issue
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 a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants