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
Thanks for the great research. Can I ask you a question? The paper said "One may replace strong augmentation in FixMatch modality-agnostic augmentation strategies, such as MixUp". I can't understand this part well. I am curious about the specific way MixUp was used in FixMatch.
For example, If there are two unlabeled data, FixMatch mixes up two data with 0.4:0.6 ratio. And FixMatch gives consistency loss between Pseudo-label and prediction. So, Ideal weakly Augmented model prediction should be [..., 0.4, 0.6, ...]. Am I right? Thanks for reading.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Thanks for the great research. Can I ask you a question? The paper said "One may replace strong augmentation in FixMatch modality-agnostic augmentation strategies, such as MixUp". I can't understand this part well. I am curious about the specific way MixUp was used in FixMatch.
For example, If there are two unlabeled data, FixMatch mixes up two data with 0.4:0.6 ratio. And FixMatch gives consistency loss between Pseudo-label and prediction. So, Ideal weakly Augmented model prediction should be [..., 0.4, 0.6, ...]. Am I right? Thanks for reading.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: