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
Thanks for sharing your work.
I wonder if there is an inherent range of values that the quality score would take, I see values > 2 and that looked out of the expected range of [0, 1] in the literature.
From the CR equation, for CCS [-1, 1] and NNCCS [-0.9, 1], CR looks to have a minimum value just below 0 and its maximum value lies at around 10.
Would you please elaborate on that?
Thanks
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hi,
There is no restriction on the FIQ values range and they do not have to be within range of [0,1].
Not all approaches in the literature have FIQ value range between 0 and 1.
Some of the approaches in the literature normalized the FIQ values to have minimum of 0 and maximum of 1. Other approaches that used for example MSE loss have value range between 0 and 1 by design. However, this d has no effect on FIQ evaluation.
Hi, There is no restriction on the FIQ values range and they do not have to be within range of [0,1]. Not all approaches in the literature have FIQ value range between 0 and 1. Some of the approaches in the literature normalized the FIQ values to have minimum of 0 and maximum of 1. Other approaches that used for example MSE loss have value range between 0 and 1 by design. However, this d has no effect on FIQ evaluation.
in that case, how would we evaluate the value is good or not, if there a range that we can use for normalization?
Hi,
Thanks for sharing your work.
I wonder if there is an inherent range of values that the quality score would take, I see values > 2 and that looked out of the expected range of [0, 1] in the literature.
From the CR equation, for CCS [-1, 1] and NNCCS [-0.9, 1], CR looks to have a minimum value just below 0 and its maximum value lies at around 10.
Would you please elaborate on that?
Thanks
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: