Skip to content
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

RGAN and RCGAN implementation #110

Open
dsevero opened this issue Aug 27, 2019 · 4 comments
Open

RGAN and RCGAN implementation #110

dsevero opened this issue Aug 27, 2019 · 4 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request feature New Feature

Comments

@dsevero
Copy link

dsevero commented Aug 27, 2019

I implemented RGAN and RCGAN from [1]. Would it make sense to add it to torchgan.models?

[1] Esteban, Cristóbal, Stephanie L. Hyland, and Gunnar Rätsch. "Real-valued (medical) time series generation with recurrent conditional gans." arXiv preprint arXiv:1706.02633 (2017).

@dsevero dsevero added enhancement New feature or request feature New Feature labels Aug 27, 2019
@avik-pal
Copy link
Member

@dsevero It seems like an interesting model to have. Go ahead an open a PR for that.

@dsevero
Copy link
Author

dsevero commented Aug 27, 2019

Great.

Also, this NN is usually used for generating time-series data. As far as I've seen torchgan.trainer.Trainer specializes in images. I had to hack it a bit so that the recon parameter was optional (doesn't make much sense to generate images in my case).

Maybe a new Trainer class is in order? SequenceTrainer?

@avik-pal
Copy link
Member

Yes seems a valid thing to do. Ideally, I would like to have a common abstraction of trainer for more variants of GAN but it is not a very simple task. For the time being, we should have a SequenceTrainer.

(I also have thoughts of deprecating the Trainer in this release for an ImageTrainer and completely removing it in a later release)

@dsevero
Copy link
Author

dsevero commented Aug 27, 2019

That was my next suggestion actually. GANs did focus on image generation in the beginning, but I think it's safe to say that the scenario has changed.

Last thing, what if the user wants to train with the tensors directly instead of a dataloader? This other hack I did (this one looks really really bad) solved it for me, but I think that supporting this directly in torch.trainer.BaseTrainer would make more sense.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request feature New Feature
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants