-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 7
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.
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
Why use two FFN layer without activated function inner? #6
Comments
I guess 2 is from the original biaffine paper. Activation .. I forget 🤣🤣
but I think adding activation to both biaffine and CRF will not change
their performance order 😃. Actually. The paper get the highest score in
this task changes the feed forward to a BiLSTM.
So if you aim for score, maybe do an LSTM. If you aim for verifying the
effectiveness of CRF over Biaffine, the current one without activation
should suffice
Cheers
…On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 10:45 AM Qznan ***@***.***> wrote:
In DeepBiaffine Parser, is that two FFN layer without activated function
equivalent to one FFN layer? Why choose to use two?
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#6>, or
unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AEHHCHPOGYJU6SU4OHEYHHLT6S3UVANCNFSM5CYVRWFA>
.
Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS
<https://apps.apple.com/app/apple-store/id1477376905?ct=notification-email&mt=8&pt=524675>
or Android
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.github.android&utm_campaign=notification-email>
.
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
In DeepBiaffine Parser, is that two FFN layer without activated function equivalent to one FFN layer? Why choose to use two?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: