Ecosyste.ms: Awesome
An open API service indexing awesome lists of open source software.
https://github.com/khanrc/tf.gans-comparison
Implementations of (theoretical) generative adversarial networks and comparison without cherry-picking
https://github.com/khanrc/tf.gans-comparison
began celeba dcgan dragan ebgan gan gans lsgan lsun tensorflow wgan wgan-gp
Last synced: about 1 month ago
JSON representation
Implementations of (theoretical) generative adversarial networks and comparison without cherry-picking
- Host: GitHub
- URL: https://github.com/khanrc/tf.gans-comparison
- Owner: khanrc
- Created: 2017-09-04T03:31:59.000Z (about 7 years ago)
- Default Branch: master
- Last Pushed: 2018-03-09T16:52:59.000Z (over 6 years ago)
- Last Synced: 2024-04-27T23:56:16.490Z (5 months ago)
- Topics: began, celeba, dcgan, dragan, ebgan, gan, gans, lsgan, lsun, tensorflow, wgan, wgan-gp
- Language: Python
- Size: 7.72 MB
- Stars: 469
- Watchers: 26
- Forks: 76
- Open Issues: 3
-
Metadata Files:
- Readme: README.md
Awesome Lists containing this project
README
# GANs comparison without cherry-picking
Implementations of some theoretical generative adversarial nets: DCGAN, EBGAN, LSGAN, WGAN, WGAN-GP, BEGAN, DRAGAN and CoulombGAN.
I implemented the structure of model equal to the structure in paper and compared it on the CelebA dataset and LSUN dataset without cherry-picking.
## Table of Contents
* [Features](#features)
* [Models](#models)
* [Dataset](#dataset)
* [CelebA](#celeba)
* [LSUN](#lsun-bedroom)
* [Results](#results)
* [DCGAN](#dcgan)
* [EBGAN](#ebgan)
* [LSGAN](#lsgan)
* [WGAN](#wgan)
* [WGAN-GP](#wgan-gp)
* [BEGAN](#began)
* [DRAGAN](#dragan)
* [CoulombGAN](#coulombgan)
* [Conclusion](#conclusion)
* [Usage](#usage)
* [Requirements](#requirements)
* [Similar works](#similar-works)
## Features
- Model architectures are same as the architectures proposed in each paper
- Each model was not much tuned, so the results can be improved
- Well-structured (was my goal at the start, but I don't know whether it succeed!)
- TensorFlow queue runner is used for input pipeline
- Single trainer (and single evaluator) - multi model structure
- Logs in training and configuration are recorded on the TensorBoard
## Models
- DCGAN
- LSGAN
- WGAN
- WGAN-GP
- EBGAN
- BEGAN
- DRAGAN
- CoulombGAN
The family of conditional GANs are excluded (CGAN, acGAN, and so on).
## Dataset
### CelebA
http://mmlab.ie.cuhk.edu.hk/projects/CelebA.html
- All experiments were performed on 64x64 CelebA dataset
- The dataset has 202599 images
- 1 epoch consists of about 1.58k iterations for batch size 128
### LSUN bedroom
http://lsun.cs.princeton.edu/2017/
- The dataset has 3033042 images
- 1 epoch consists of about 23.7k iterations for batch size 128
This dataset is provided in [LMDB](http://www.lmdb.tech/) format. https://github.com/fyu/lsun provides documentation and demo code to use it.
## Results
- I implemented the same as the proposed model in each paper, but ignored some details (or the paper did not describe details of model)
- Granted, a little details make great differences in the results due to the very unstable GAN training
- So if you had a better results, let me know the settings 🙂
- Default batch_size=128 and z_dim=100 (from DCGAN)
### DCGAN
Radford, Alec, Luke Metz, and Soumith Chintala. "Unsupervised representation learning with deep convolutional generative adversarial networks." arXiv preprint arXiv:1511.06434 (2015).
- Relatively simple networks
- Learning rate for discriminator (D_lr) is 2e-4 and learning rate for generator (G_lr) is 2e-4 (proposed in the paper) and 1e-3
| G_lr=2e-4 | G_lr=1e-3 |
| :--------------------------------------: | :--------------------------------------: |
| 50k | 30k |
|  |  |
Second row (50k, 30k) indicates each training iteration.
Higher learning rate (1e-3) for generator made better results. In this case, however, the generator has been collapsed sometimes due to its large learning rate. Lowering both learning rate may bring stability like https://ajolicoeur.wordpress.com/cats/ in which suggested D_lr=5e-5 and G_lr=2e-4.
| LSUN |
| :--------------------------------------: |
| 100k |
|  |
### EBGAN
Zhao, Junbo, Michael Mathieu, and Yann LeCun. "Energy-based generative adversarial network." arXiv preprint arXiv:1609.03126 (2016).
- I like energy concept, so this paper is very interesting for me :)
- But there is criticism: [Are Energy-Based GANs any more energy-based than normal GANs?](http://www.inference.vc/are-energy-based-gans-actually-energy-based/)
- Anyway, the energy concept and autoencoder based loss function are impressive, and the results are also fine
- But I have a question for Pulling-away Term (PT), which prevents mode-collapse theoretically. This is the same idea as minibatch discrimination (T. Salimans et al).
| pt weight = 0.1 | No pt loss |
| :--------------------------------------: | :--------------------------------------: |
| 30k | 30k |
|  |  |
The model using PT generates slightly better sample visually. However, it is not clear from this results whether PT prevents mode-collapse. Furthermore, I could not distinguish what setting is better from repeated experiments.
| pt weight = 0.1 | No pt loss |
| :--------------------------------------: | :--------------------------------------: |
|  |  |
pt_loss decreases a little faster in the left which used pt_weight=0.1 but there is no big difference and even at the end the right which used no pt_loss showed a lower pt_loss. So I wonder: is the PT loss really working for preventing mode-collapse as described in the paper?
| LSUN |
| :-------------------------------------: |
| 80k |
|  |
### LSGAN
Mao, Xudong, et al. "Least squares generative adversarial networks." arXiv preprint ArXiv:1611.04076 (2016).
- Unusually, LSGAN used large latent space dimension (z_dim=1024)
- But in my experiment, z_dim=100 makes better results than z_dim=1024 which is originally used in paper
| z_dim=100 | z_dim=1024 |
| :--------------------------------------: | :--------------------------------------: |
| 30k | 30k |
|  |  |
| LSUN |
| :--------------------------------------: |
| 150k |
|  |
### WGAN
Arjovsky, Martin, Soumith Chintala, and Léon Bottou. "Wasserstein gan." arXiv preprint arXiv:1701.07875 (2017).
- The samples from WGAN are not that impressive - compared to the very impressive theory
- Also no specific network structure proposed, so DCGAN architecture was used for experiments
- In the [author's implementation](https://github.com/martinarjovsky/WassersteinGAN), they used higher n_critic in the early stage of training and per 500 iterations
| 30k | W distance |
| :-------------------------------------: | :--------------------------------------: |
|  |  |
| LSUN |
| :-------------------------------------: |
| 230k |
|  |
### WGAN-GP
Gulrajani, Ishaan, et al. "Improved training of wasserstein gans." arXiv preprint arXiv:1704.00028 (2017).
- I tried two network architectures, which are DCGAN architecture and ResNet architecture in appendix C
- ResNet has more complicated architecture and better performance than DCGAN architecture
- The interesting thing is that the visual quality of samples improves very quickly (ResNet WGAN-GP has best samples on 7k iterations) and it gets worse when continue training
- According to DRAGAN, constraints of WGAN are too restrictive to learn good generator
| DCGAN architecture | ResNet architecture |
| :--------------------------------------: | :--------------------------------------: |
| 30k | 7k, batch size = 64 |
|  |  |
| LSUN |
| :--------------------------------------: |
| 100k, ResNet architecture |
|  |
#### Face collapse phenomenon
WGAN-GP was collapsed more than other models when the iteration increases.
**DCGAN architecture**
| 10k | 20k | 30k |
| :--------------------------------------: | :--------------------------------------: | :--------------------------------------: |
|  |  |  |
**ResNet architecture**
ResNet architecture showed the best visual quality sample in the very early stage, 7k iteration in my criteria. This maybe due to the residual architecture.
batch_size=64.
| 5k | 7k | 10k | 15k |
| :--------------------------------------: | :--------------------------------------: | :--------------------------------------: | :--------------------------------------: |
|  |  |  |  |
| 20k | 25k | 30k | 40k |
|  |  |  |  |
Regardless of the face collapse phenomenon, the Wasserstein distance decreased steadily. It should come from that the critic (discriminator) network failed to find the supremum and K-Lipschitz function.
| DCGAN architecture | ResNet architecture |
| :--------------------------------------: | :--------------------------------------: |
|  |  |
|  |  |
The plots in the last row of the table are just expanded version of the plots in the second row.
It is interesting that W_dist < 0 at the end of the training. This indicates that E[fake] > E[real] and, in the point of original GAN view, it means the generator dominates the discriminator.
### BEGAN
Berthelot, David, Tom Schumm, and Luke Metz. "Began: Boundary equilibrium generative adversarial networks." arXiv preprint arXiv:1703.10717 (2017).
- The best model that generates samples with the best visual quality as far as I know
- It also showed the best performance in this project
- Even though optional improvements was not implemented (section 3.5.1 in the paper)
- However, the samples generated by BEGAN give a slightly different feel from other models - it seems like disappearing details.
- So I just wonder what the results are for different datasets
batch_size=16, z_dim=64, gamma=0.5.
| 30k | 50k | 75k |
| :--------------------------------------: | :--------------------------------------: | :--------------------------------------: |
|  |  |  |
| Convergence measure M |
| :-----------------------------------: |
|  |
I also tried to reduce speck-like artifacts as suggested in [Heumi/BEGAN-tensorflow](https://github.com/Heumi/BEGAN-tensorflow/), but it did not go away.
BEGAN in the LSUN datset works terribly. Not only severe mode-collapse was observed, but also generated images were not realistic.
| LSUN | LSUN |
| :--------------------------------------: | :--------------------------------------: |
| 100k | 150k |
|  |  |
| 200k | 250k |
|  |  |
### DRAGAN
Kodali, Naveen, et al. "How to Train Your DRAGAN." arXiv preprint arXiv:1705.07215 (2017).
- Different with other papers, DRAGAN was motivated from the game theory for improving performance of GAN
- This approach through the game theory is highly unique and interesting
- But, IMHO, there is not much real contribution. The algorithm is similar to WGAN-GP
| DCGAN architecture |
| :--------------------------------------: |
| 120k |
|  |
The original paper has some bugs. One of those is image x is pertured only positive-sided. I applied two-sided perturbation as the author admitted this bug on the [GitHub](https://github.com/kodalinaveen3/DRAGAN).
| LSUN |
| :--------------------------------------: |
| 200k |
|  |
### CoulombGAN
Unterthiner, Thomas, et al. "Coulomb GANs: Provably Optimal Nash Equilibria via Potential Fields." arXiv preprint arXiv:1708.08819 (2017).
- CoulombGAN has also very interesting perspective - "Coulomb potential".
- It is very interesting but I don't know whether it is GAN.
- CoulombGAN tried to solve the diversity problem (mode collapse)
G_lr=5e-4, D_lr=25e-5, z_dim=32.
| DCGAN architecture |
| :--------------------------------------: |
| 200k |
|  |
The disadvantage of this model is that it takes a very long time to train despite the simplicity of network architecture. Further, like original GAN, there is no convergence measure. I thought that the potentials of fake samples served as a convergence measure, but it did not.
## Usage
Download CelebA dataset:
```
$ python download.py celebA
$ python download.py lsun
```
Convert images to tfrecords format:
Options for converting are hard-coded, so ensure to modify it before run `convert.py`. In particular, LSUN dataset is provided in LMDB format.
```
$ python convert.py
```
Train:
If you want to change the settings of each model, you must also modify code directly.
```
$ python train.py --help
usage: train.py [-h] [--num_epochs NUM_EPOCHS] [--batch_size BATCH_SIZE]
[--num_threads NUM_THREADS] --model MODEL [--name NAME]
--dataset DATASET [--ckpt_step CKPT_STEP] [--renew]
optional arguments:
-h, --help show this help message and exit
--num_epochs NUM_EPOCHS
default: 20
--batch_size BATCH_SIZE
default: 128
--num_threads NUM_THREADS
# of data read threads (default: 4)
--model MODEL DCGAN / LSGAN / WGAN / WGAN-GP / EBGAN / BEGAN /
DRAGAN / CoulombGAN
--name NAME default: name=model
--dataset DATASET, -D DATASET
CelebA / LSUN
--ckpt_step CKPT_STEP
# of steps for saving checkpoint (default: 5000)
--renew train model from scratch - clean saved checkpoints and
summaries
```
Monitor through TensorBoard:
```
$ tensorboard --logdir=summary/dataset/name
```
Evaluate (generate fake samples):
```
$ python eval.py --help
usage: eval.py [-h] --model MODEL [--name NAME] --dataset DATASET
[--sample_size SAMPLE_SIZE]
optional arguments:
-h, --help show this help message and exit
--model MODEL DCGAN / LSGAN / WGAN / WGAN-GP / EBGAN / BEGAN /
DRAGAN / CoulombGAN
--name NAME default: name=model
--dataset DATASET, -D DATASET
CelebA / LSUN
--sample_size SAMPLE_SIZE, -N SAMPLE_SIZE
# of samples. It should be a square number. (default:
16)
```
### Requirements
- python 2.7
- tensorflow >= 1.2 (verified on 1.2 and 1.3)
- tqdm
- (optional) pynvml - for automatic gpu selection
## Similar works
- https://ajolicoeur.wordpress.com/cats/
- [wiseodd/generative-models](https://github.com/wiseodd/generative-models)
- [hwalsuklee/tensorflow-generative-model-collections](https://github.com/hwalsuklee/tensorflow-generative-model-collections)
- [sanghoon/tf-exercise-gan](https://github.com/sanghoon/tf-exercise-gan)
- [YadiraF/GAN_Theories](https://github.com/YadiraF/GAN_Theories)