Description
Hi! Thank you for your work!
I’m a beginner trying to reproduce results from the paper. After generating images using the provided code, I computed FID and LPIPS metrics([https://github.com//issues/3]) but observed significant differences compared to Table 1 in the paper (FID: 274.52 vs. reported 55.30, LPIPS: 0.494 vs. reported 0.36).
File Structure
evaluate_img/
├── exp1_200/
│ ├── CACTIF_transfer_1.png
│ ├── CACTIF_transfer_2.png
│ └── ...
├── origin_200/
│ ├── 00001.png
│ ├── 00002.png
│ └── ...
└── citystyle_1/
├── 1.png
├── 2.png
└── ...
Steps to Reproduce
-
Image Generation & Structure:
- Generated 200 output images via CACTIF transfer, stored in
evaluate_img/exp1_200/ (nb_img_per_style: int = 200)
- Used 200 original GTA images from
evaluate_img/origin_200/ .
- Created style reference by duplicating
zurich_000087_000019_leftImg8bit 200 times into evaluate_img/citystyle_1/ .
-
FID Calculation (via pytorch_fid):
python -m pytorch_fid evaluate_img/citystyle_1 evaluate_img/exp1_200 --device cuda:1
Result: FID = 274.52 (expected: 55.30).
-
LPIPS Calculation (modified script):
Used a custom lpips_sim2real.py to handle mismatched filenames:
python PerceptualSimilarity/lpips_sim2real.py -d0 evaluate_img/origin_200 -d1 evaluate_img/exp1_200 -o evaluate_img/example_dists.txt --use_gpu --gpu_id 1
Result: Avg. LPIPS = 0.494 (expected: 0.36).
Request for Help
As a beginner working to reproduce these results, I would be deeply grateful for any guidance on where I might be going wrong. Any overlooked steps in the reproduction process that might explain the metric discrepancies?
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Description
Hi! Thank you for your work!
I’m a beginner trying to reproduce results from the paper. After generating images using the provided code, I computed FID and LPIPS metrics([https://github.com//issues/3]) but observed significant differences compared to Table 1 in the paper (FID: 274.52 vs. reported 55.30, LPIPS: 0.494 vs. reported 0.36).
File Structure
Steps to Reproduce
Image Generation & Structure:
evaluate_img/exp1_200/(nb_img_per_style: int = 200)evaluate_img/origin_200/.zurich_000087_000019_leftImg8bit200 times intoevaluate_img/citystyle_1/.FID Calculation (via
pytorch_fid):Result: FID = 274.52 (expected: 55.30).
LPIPS Calculation (modified script):
Used a custom
lpips_sim2real.pyto handle mismatched filenames:Result: Avg. LPIPS = 0.494 (expected: 0.36).
Request for Help
As a beginner working to reproduce these results, I would be deeply grateful for any guidance on where I might be going wrong. Any overlooked steps in the reproduction process that might explain the metric discrepancies?
Thank you for your time and consideration.