Skip to main content

Blog

Learn About Our Meetup

5000+ Members

MEETUPS

LEARN, CONNECT, SHARE

Join our meetup, learn, connect, share, and get to know your Toronto AI community. 

JOB POSTINGS

INDEED POSTINGS

Browse through the latest deep learning, ai, machine learning postings from Indeed for the GTA.

CONTACT

CONNECT WITH US

Are you looking to sponsor space, be a speaker, or volunteer, feel free to give us a shout.

[D] Why is DiscoGAN better at geometrical transformation when compared to CycleGAN ?

Hi All,

CycleGAN and DiscoGAN are very similar in their functionality and seem to be concurrent works. The loss function of CycleGAN is L1 loss while DiscoGAN uses MSE. CycleGAN has an additional identity loss function.

While CycleGAN produces impressive results on horse2zebra, it seems to fail at the task of cat2dog (geometric transformation). DiscoGAN, on the other hand, is able to perform the task of Handbags2Shoes.

TL;DR: What makes DiscoGAN perform the geometrical transformation better than CycleGAN ? Is it the network architecture or the MSE loss function or is there is a secret sauce ?

submitted by /u/phd_or_not
[link] [comments]