Demystifying Randomly Initialized Networks for Evaluating Generative Models
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Evaluation of generative models is mostly based on the comparison between the estimated distribution and the ground truth distribution in a certain feature space. To embed samples into informative features, previous works often use convolutional neural networks optimized for classification, which is criticized by recent studies. Therefore, various feature spaces have been explored to discover alternatives. Among them, a surprising approach is to use a randomly initialized neural network for feature embedding. However, the fundamental basis to employ the random features has not been sufficiently justified. In this paper, we rigorously investigate the feature space of models with random weights in comparison to that of trained models. Furthermore, we provide an empirical evidence to choose networks for random features to obtain consistent and reliable results. Our results indicate that the features from random networks can evaluate generative models well similarly to those from trained networks, and furthermore, the two types of features can be used together in a complementary way.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 29 of its 46 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 19 Aug 2022.
Builds on
29 of 46 references.
References · 29
- 2021Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervisioncited by 33,744
- 2020An Image is Worth 16x16 Words: Transformers for Image Recognition at Scalecited by 30,186
- 2019PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Librarycited by 20,305
- 2014Very Deep Convolutional Networks for Large-Scale Image Recognitioncited by 15,364
- 2021Swin Transformer: Hierarchical Vision Transformer using Shifted Windowscited by 12,139
- 2021Diffusion Models Beat GANs on Image Synthesiscited by 8,255
- 2018A Style-Based Generator Architecture for Generative Adversarial Networkscited by 6,013
- 2015Rethinking the Inception Architecture for Computer Visioncited by 5,475
- 2015Delving Deep into Rectifiers: Surpassing Human-Level Performance on ImageNet Classificationcited by 3,611
- 2019Analyzing and Improving the Image Quality of StyleGANcited by 3,588
- 2016Improved Techniques for Training GANscited by 2,970
- 2020Unsupervised Learning of Visual Features by Contrasting Cluster Assignmentscited by 2,857
17 more
- 2018Large Scale GAN Training for High Fidelity Natural Image Synthesiscited by 2,626
- 2018The Lottery Ticket Hypothesis: Finding Sparse, Trainable Neural Networkscited by 2,262
- 2018Demystifying MMD GANscited by 1,293
- 2017Deep Image Priorcited by 1,098
- 2019Improved Precision and Recall Metric for Assessing Generative Modelscited by 944
- 2022StyleGAN-XL: Scaling StyleGAN to Large Diverse Datasetscited by 492
- 2020Reliable Fidelity and Diversity Metrics for Generative Modelscited by 434
- 2018Assessing Generative Models via Precision and Recallcited by 406
- 2015A note on the evaluation of generative modelscited by 292
- 2019What's Hidden in a Randomly Weighted Neural Network?cited by 237
- 2022The Role of ImageNet Classes in Fr'echet Inception Distancecited by 213
- 2021Projected GANs Converge Fastercited by 208
- 2019Effectively Unbiased FID and Inception Score and where to find themcited by 165
- 2018IntroVAE: Introspective Variational Autoencoders for Photographic Image Synthesiscited by 85
- 2022Rarity Score : A New Metric to Evaluate the Uncommonness of Synthesized Imagescited by 35
- 2022Efficient-VDVAE: Less is morecited by 26
- 2022Learning from Randomly Initialized Neural Network Featurescited by 12
Built on by
Not cited yet.