Question about L1 loss weight_know vs weight_missing about lama

[windj007]

Hi! Thank you for your interest in our work!

L1 is not used and we just forgot to strip this parameter from the configs. Sorry for confusion.

[Marcelo5444]

Therefore what is the a correct config in order to do finetunning on small masks, Celebhq small masks has L1 values mask not to zero, so I guess celebhq small mask was trained with L1 then?

[windj007]

Could you please point, which config has nonzero l1 weight for missing areas?

[Marcelo5444]

What I meant is that in previous post you said that L1 loss was not used but looking at the configs. It is used in may. One example of this is lama-celeba-hq/lama_small_train_masks

[Marcelo5444]

Also, why You set the weight_know to 10, this is to force that the inpainted image as a similar aspect in out-of-mask zones?

[windj007]

weight_known is only applied to parts of images outside the mask and it does not affect actual inpainting quality - you can safely switch it off. weight_missing is the weight of l1 inside mask - and it is set to 0 in all our configs. This is why I tell that L1 is not used.

Also, why You set the weight_know to 10, this is to force that the inpainted image as a similar aspect in out-of-mask zones?

Original motivation was like that, but later we figured out that this is not necessary. weight_known is there just for historical reasons - and it can be safely removed

[Marcelo5444]

Can you point me to configurations trained with CelebHQ that weight_known is set to 0. In all of them weight_known is set to 10 and affects the training.

[windj007]

I did not tell that we have weight_known=0 in any configs. The point is that the resulting quality does not depend on this parameter be it 0 or 10 or 100.

[windj007]

I'm closing the issue for now. If you have any other questions, feel free to reopen it or create a new one.