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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Add missing word #11

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Add missing word #11

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion public/index.html
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -414,7 +414,7 @@ <h2>Better Upsampling</h2>
</figure>

<p>Both deconvolution and the different resize-convolution approaches are linear operations, and can be interpreted as matrices.
This a helpful way to see the differences between them.
This is a helpful way to see the differences between them.
Where deconvolution has a unique entry for each output window, resize-convolution is implicitly weight-tying in a way that discourages high frequency artifacts.</p>

<p>We've had our best results with nearest-neighbor interpolation, and had difficulty making bilinear resize work.
Expand Down