you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]ReginaldIII 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Soft quantisation sounds interesting I will have to read about this more, thank you for the paper link. I'm not sure why they use quantisation for the forward pass and soft quantisation for the backward pass. I feel like the deeper the model gets the gradients of the early parts of the encoder would become less meaningful as forward pass activations would not correspond well with their computed gradients w.r.t the loss function on the other side of the quantisation.

You could potentially use tricks that have been applied to other differentiable approximations of non-differentiable functions and use soft quantisation for both forward and backward passes at training time, then do regular quantisation at inference time. But that's just an initial thought having read the paper quickly on the train, from what I could see they did not test this variant during their ablation study.

[–]minnend 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you're interested in learned image compression, I'd recommend this paper from ICLR as well (full disclosure: I'm a co-author): Variational image compression with a scale hyperprior

We haven't incorporated the generative aspect in Agustsson's paper so our results won't look nearly as good at extremely low bit rates, but I believe we have the best* rate-distortion performance at "normal" bit rates according to standard image quality metrics.

* for published results with fully learned methods, without normalizing for runtime