Skill Rating for Generative Models
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
We explore a new way to evaluate generative models using insights from evaluation of competitive games between human players. We show experimentally that tournaments between generators and discriminators provide an effective way to evaluate generative models. We introduce two methods for summarizing tournament outcomes: tournament win rate and skill rating. Evaluations are useful in different contexts, including monitoring the progress of a single model as it learns during the training process, and comparing the capabilities of two different fully trained models. We show that a tournament consisting of a single model playing against past and future versions of itself produces a useful measure of training progress. A tournament containing multiple separate models (using different seeds, hyperparameters, and architectures) provides a useful relative comparison between different trained GANs. Tournament-based rating methods are conceptually distinct from numerous previous categories of approaches to evaluation of generative models, and have complementary advantages and disadvantages.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 14 Aug 2018.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 2; 2022: 2.
4 papers.
- 2021Manifold Topology Divergence: a Framework for Comparing Data Manifoldscited by 31
- 2022A Realism Metric for Generated LiDAR Point Cloudscited by 5
- 2021On Characterizing GAN Convergence Through Proximal Duality Gapcited by 3
- 2022Evolving SimGANs to Improve Abnormal Electrocardiogram Classificationcited by 1
- 2022A Realism Metric for Generated LiDAR Point Clouds31 Aug 2022
- 2022Evolving SimGANs to Improve Abnormal Electrocardiogram Classification12 May 2022
- 2021Manifold Topology Divergence: a Framework for Comparing Data Manifolds8 Jun 2021
- 2021On Characterizing GAN Convergence Through Proximal Duality Gap11 May 2021