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

Issues regarding the particle filtering model #37

Open
SunnyCYC opened this issue Jan 17, 2024 · 0 comments
Open

Issues regarding the particle filtering model #37

SunnyCYC opened this issue Jan 17, 2024 · 0 comments

Comments

@SunnyCYC
Copy link

Hi,

Many thanks for this cool work!
I have two questions regarding the particle filtering (PF) model:

  1. The model does not produce same results for the same activation functions of a same track. In the attached jupyter notebook (pf-repeat-issue.ipynb), I run PF on a same activation function for five times, and get different results.
  2. The model does not work on `ideal activation function'. In the pf-groundtruth-issue.ipynb, I generate an ideal activation function using beat annotations, which would only have peaks at beat positions. But the PF generate very low Recall for that.

The notebooks are shared via google drive: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1_H8u847bVnUP7Lfome8WuO98FNaU4Jew?usp=sharing

Are these issues expected because of the sampling process of PF? Or, is there any way we may avoid/alleviate these issues? Also, is there any idea regarding the variance/std of the PF performance under different conditions (e.g., genres)?
Just want to make sure I didn't use your model wrong. Thank you!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant