We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
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
Thanks for your great job!
Recently I am trying to reimplement the PINO on Darcy Flow.
I found that if I set f_loss=0, the result is getting better and converge faster.
f_loss=0
The configuration (part) is follow:
data: name: 'Darcy' path: './Darcy_421/piececonst_r421_N1024_smooth1.mat' total_num: 1024 offset: 0 n_sample: 1000 nx: 421 sub: 7 pde_sub: 2 model: layers: [64, 64, 64, 64, 64] modes1: [20, 20, 20, 20] modes2: [20, 20, 20, 20] fc_dim: 128 act: gelu pad_ratio: [0., 0.] train: batchsize: 20 num_iter: 30_001 milestones: [5_000, 7_500, 10_000] base_lr: 0.001 scheduler_gamma: 0.5 f_loss: 1.0 xy_loss: 5.0 save_step: 500000 eval_step: 1_000 test: path: './Darcy_421/piececonst_r421_N1024_smooth2.mat' total_num: 1024 offset: 0 n_sample: 500 nx: 421 sub: 2 batchsize: 1 log: logdir: PINO-DarcyFlow-Caltech-debug entity: x project: PINO-DF-Caltech wandb_mode: online
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Same here. Tested for both Burgers and Darcy.
Sorry, something went wrong.
No branches or pull requests
Thanks for your great job!
Recently I am trying to reimplement the PINO on Darcy Flow.
I found that if I set
f_loss=0
, the result is getting better and converge faster.The configuration (part) is follow:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: