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
Hi, I wanted to know more about the decision to have motion boundaries be described as "certain" (MOTION_BOUNDARIE_VALUE = 255) in the consistency checker, as in the associated paper as well as your previous work from 2016, you describe masking out motion boundaries as uncertain.
I ran consistencyChecker with MOTION_BOUNDARIE_VALUE = 0 and got very different results on a sample operation; naturally, the cert file was darker, having more regions masked out. I haven't tested it on a video yet, as clearly the current version works as-is. I'm more interested to know the reasons behind the discrepancy, or if you do something like set MOTION_BOUNDARIE_VALUE to 0 during train time and 255 for test time—or if I'm perhaps misunderstanding how the certs are calculated.
Thanks!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hi, I wanted to know more about the decision to have motion boundaries be described as "certain" (
MOTION_BOUNDARIE_VALUE = 255
) in the consistency checker, as in the associated paper as well as your previous work from 2016, you describe masking out motion boundaries as uncertain.I ran
consistencyChecker
withMOTION_BOUNDARIE_VALUE = 0
and got very different results on a sample operation; naturally, the cert file was darker, having more regions masked out. I haven't tested it on a video yet, as clearly the current version works as-is. I'm more interested to know the reasons behind the discrepancy, or if you do something like setMOTION_BOUNDARIE_VALUE
to0
during train time and255
for test time—or if I'm perhaps misunderstanding how the certs are calculated.Thanks!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: