Re: [Kaldi-users] reproducing numbers in wsj/s5

[Mailing l. u. f. U. C. a. U. <kal...@li...>]

OK, that is quite weird.  What is the avg like/frame on the final
update.??.log?
Dan



On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 5:00 PM, Mailing list used for User Communication
and Updates <kal...@li...> wrote:

> Unfortunately those are absolute differences. Here is what I get for the
> mono0a.
>
>     %WER 40.44 [ 2282 / 5643, 118 ins, 537 del, 1627 sub ]
> exp/mono0a/decode_tgpr_eval92/wer_9
>
> And below is the reported one in RESULTS.
>
>     exp/mono0a/decode_tgpr_eval92/wer_10:%WER 25.54 [ 1441 / 5643, 149
> ins, 191 del, 1101 sub ]
>
> I will try to checkout the same version as the RESULTS file and run
> the experiments again.
>
> Here is the total data count from exp/mono0a/log/update.0.log.
>
>     LOG (gmm-sum-accs:main():gmm-sum-accs.cc:60) Summed 2 stats, total
> count 849568, avg like/frame -109.265
>
> Thanks for your help.
>
> Hao
>
> On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 3:43 PM, Mailing list used for User
> Communication and Updates <kal...@li...> wrote:
> > Assuming those are relative numbers, they're probably within the margin
> of
> > error.  See if it's the same on other test sets.  Because various
> algorithms
> > call rand(), and different machines implement this differently, results
> > aren't fully reproducible.
> >
> > But to check that it's not some code change that hurts the results, you
> > could try checking out a copy with the same revision number as the
> RESULTS
> > file, and running again and seeing what results you get.  If there is a
> > difference, I'd like to know.
> >
> > It's also possible some files were missing in your WSJ distribution--
> let me
> > know the data count reported in one the */log/update.log files and I'll
> > compare with a local copy.
> >
> > Dan
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 4:34 PM, Mailing list used for User Communication
> and
> > Updates <kal...@li...> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I'm following the WSJ s5 recipe, and I wasn't able to reproduce the
> >> results stated in the RESULTS file. Are we supposed to get exactly the
> >> same numbers with the (hyper-)parameters given in the recipe?
> >>
> >> Just to give a sense of how far I'm off. My monophone models perform 10%
> >> worse than the reported results on eval92 and the resulting triphone
> >> models perform 4% worse.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Hao
> >>
> >>
> >>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> How ServiceNow helps IT people transform IT departments:
> >> 1. A cloud service to automate IT design, transition and operations
> >> 2. Dashboards that offer high-level views of enterprise services
> >> 3. A single system of record for all IT processes
> >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/servicenow-d2d-j
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Kaldi-users mailing list
> >> Kal...@li...
> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kaldi-users
> >
> >
> >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > How ServiceNow helps IT people transform IT departments:
> > 1. A cloud service to automate IT design, transition and operations
> > 2. Dashboards that offer high-level views of enterprise services
> > 3. A single system of record for all IT processes
> > http://p.sf.net/sfu/servicenow-d2d-j
> > _______________________________________________
> > Kaldi-users mailing list
> > Kal...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kaldi-users
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> How ServiceNow helps IT people transform IT departments:
> 1. A cloud service to automate IT design, transition and operations
> 2. Dashboards that offer high-level views of enterprise services
> 3. A single system of record for all IT processes
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/servicenow-d2d-j
> _______________________________________________
> Kaldi-users mailing list
> Kal...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kaldi-users
>