You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I only replace the weight tensors using the NumPy function in this repository.
However, the post-training results are much higher than those in your paper.
For example, the 4-bit and 5-bit results of mine are 49.25% and 69.56% (The source accuracy is 76.13% in PyTorch), the paper reported 29.0% and 67.2%.
Is there something about calibration I missed?
Could you provide more details about the implementation?
Thanks!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hi,
Thanks for your open-source of the AdaptivFloat. It is an impressive paper.
I implemented your code in Resnet-50 model with imageNet dataset.(https://github.com/pytorch/vision/blob/master/torchvision/models/resnet.py)
I quantized 54 layers (including downsample layers) only on weight:
enabling quant: conv1
enabling quant: layer1.0.conv1
enabling quant: layer1.0.conv2
enabling quant: layer1.0.conv3
enabling quant: layer1.0.downsample.0
enabling quant: layer1.1.conv1
enabling quant: layer1.1.conv2
enabling quant: layer1.1.conv3
enabling quant: layer1.2.conv1
enabling quant: layer1.2.conv2
enabling quant: layer1.2.conv3
enabling quant: layer2.0.conv1
enabling quant: layer2.0.conv2
enabling quant: layer2.0.conv3
enabling quant: layer2.0.downsample.0
enabling quant: layer2.1.conv1
enabling quant: layer2.1.conv2
enabling quant: layer2.1.conv3
enabling quant: layer2.2.conv1
enabling quant: layer2.2.conv2
enabling quant: layer2.2.conv3
enabling quant: layer2.3.conv1
enabling quant: layer2.3.conv2
enabling quant: layer2.3.conv3
enabling quant: layer3.0.conv1
enabling quant: layer3.0.conv2
enabling quant: layer3.0.conv3
enabling quant: layer3.0.downsample.0
enabling quant: layer3.1.conv1
enabling quant: layer3.1.conv2
enabling quant: layer3.1.conv3
enabling quant: layer3.2.conv1
enabling quant: layer3.2.conv2
enabling quant: layer3.2.conv3
enabling quant: layer3.3.conv1
enabling quant: layer3.3.conv2
enabling quant: layer3.3.conv3
enabling quant: layer3.4.conv1
enabling quant: layer3.4.conv2
enabling quant: layer3.4.conv3
enabling quant: layer3.5.conv1
enabling quant: layer3.5.conv2
enabling quant: layer3.5.conv3
enabling quant: layer4.0.conv1
enabling quant: layer4.0.conv2
enabling quant: layer4.0.conv3
enabling quant: layer4.0.downsample.0
enabling quant: layer4.1.conv1
enabling quant: layer4.1.conv2
enabling quant: layer4.1.conv3
enabling quant: layer4.2.conv1
enabling quant: layer4.2.conv2
enabling quant: layer4.2.conv3
enabling quant: fc
I only replace the weight tensors using the NumPy function in this repository.
However, the post-training results are much higher than those in your paper.
For example, the 4-bit and 5-bit results of mine are 49.25% and 69.56% (The source accuracy is 76.13% in PyTorch), the paper reported 29.0% and 67.2%.
Is there something about calibration I missed?
Could you provide more details about the implementation?
Thanks!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: