Day 26

We started having morning meetings again.

I started the day by testing the three models waiting for me. Two were pretty bad, one was ok. I’m running two more right now, but I’m not sure what I should be doing to make them improve. Right now I'm changing how often the networks are optimized to hopefully balance them more.

I spent most of the day working on my presentation by organizing the graphs and images I want to show. They’re not great, but if they’re the best I can do then so be it.

In the afternoon I had another meeting where Joe went over David's presentation and then mine to give feedback and see if there was any overlap in background information.

I hope I can meet with my advisors soon to go over my presentation as well.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Day 30 (Last Day!!)

It's hard to believe it's over. This morning we had our presentations in the auditorium, and everyone did really well. I remembered pretty much everything I wanted to say, and I think I explained my topic thoroughly. The presentations ended at almost exactly 11, and after closing remarks, photographs, and conversations, I stayed behind at RIT for a while and sent my files with the final code to my advisors. At noon my lab (which also includes two other graduate students) went out to lunch to celebrate, which was really nice because we ended up talking a lot (and not about debugging!) and I got to know them better. It's a little bittersweet because now my involvement is over, but it was a really rewarding experience and I learned how to do something new (many things actually). Overall, although it was stressful at times, I'm glad I ended up having so much autonomy with my project because it really taught me a lot about myself and about making mistakes. I'm going
Read more

Day 27

I tested some more models today- no significant improvements. But I got to meet with both of my advisors in the morning for at least an hour to go over my presentation so I got a lot of good feedback and also some explanations for why the results haven’t been that great. It turns out that the U-Net structure is ok for RGB-to-thermal translation, which is reflected in the graphs and output images, but not so great for thermal to RGB because that translation ends up with increased complexity/texture. Translating from thermal to RGB accurately is difficult on its own, but with a model and/or loss function not suited to that translation specifically, it could mislead the training. That could also explain why the results using the paired dataset are worse- it’s not making the right connections between the two modalities and when it only has the exact image to compare to rather than something more varied it actually makes it worse. I also got suggestions to improve the image quality like add
Read more

Day 28

I tested the model from yesterday and it looks surprisingly similar to the best one- the color of the sky is a little split between pink and blue but is blended in most of the images, and overall the objects look a little sharper. The graphs for the loss don’t make that much sense though, and the PSNR for the RGB images fluctuates a lot. This morning we ran through our presentations in the auditorium. We started at 9 am and didn’t finish until 11:50, but we had a lot of time in between each one for feedback. Mine was second and went 16 minutes (better time than I thought) and I got a lot of good advice too. Sometimes I forget that other people haven’t seen my presentation/topic before so I have to remember to explain/define everything. At lunch Jocelyn, Hannah, and I went out to eat and then to Abbott's. We also saw a beaver by the RIT entrance!  In the afternoon I worked on my presentation some more- I cut out some of the graphs as Joe suggested and also made the diagrams clear
Read more