You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I could efficiently add support for convolutional\kernel\filter layers while preserving overall performance via just a fake-activation function and a simple condition when loading weights (i.e. "activation function" defined as FILTER...). Pottentialy by squeezing the logic of what-the-size-of-filter-is under the rest of the single byte of each activation function ... for example (considering all activation functions supported by this library are 14+5 custom ones and byte-size allows use up to 255) activation function defined by name FILTERX as 22 could be 2x2, or 98 9x8 or 101 10x1 and so on... (or even better i could also shift 22 to represent 1x2 [or even by a predifined shifting variable]) like who's going to use more than 255 on an MCU... let's be honest... although I could also add such a preference too... And finally by manipulating the output via that filter\fake-activation function. +additional destructor logic
Outro:
It always sounds exciting and funny until I start working on it and realise it isn't as easy as first thought lol
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
My thought proccess:
I could efficiently add support for convolutional\kernel\filter layers while preserving overall performance via just a fake-activation function and a simple condition when loading weights (i.e. "activation function" defined as FILTER...). Pottentialy by squeezing the logic of what-the-size-of-filter-is under the rest of the single byte of each activation function ... for example (considering all activation functions supported by this library are 14+5 custom ones and byte-size allows use up to 255) activation function defined by name
FILTERX
as22
could be 2x2, or98
9x8 or101
10x1 and so on... (or even better i could also shift 22 to represent 1x2 [or even by a predifined shifting variable]) like who's going to use more than255
on an MCU... let's be honest... although I could also add such a preference too... And finally by manipulating the output via that filter\fake-activation function. +additional destructor logicOutro:
It always sounds exciting and funny until I start working on it and realise it isn't as easy as first thought lol
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: