-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 69
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
accuracy is lower than presented in paper #39
Comments
Never mind ,I found my mistakes ,this project is great |
Good luck to you research 😉 |
I have the same problem as you. I used the way mentioned in the paper for the seed dataset and also trained with the conformer model, but ended up with a very low accuracy on the test dataset, what did you do to correct it? |
In fact,it still bother me that in my conformer model that the in each subject,first fold of the experiment is always much more lower than the other 4 fold for example the subject 1 the first fold is about 76% and the other is 95%,I dont konw why and it not suppose to happend. I used author's frame to divide the dataset and train the model.maybe you should try it. hope it can help you |
OK, thanks for your advice! I have another question, what is the shape of your input data? Is it (3394, 1, 62, 200)? |
我的输入是 n,1,62,200,n是多少个样本我没注意过,应该是3394 |
好的,感谢 |
i used the files in preprocessing to process the seed dataset and that train the model ,everything is fine however the test accuracy seem to The accuracy converged to around 70%. This much lower then what is presented in the paper,I am wondering why is this happening
did i miss some peperprocess step?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: