Isaacwang commited on
Commit
df772df
Β·
verified Β·
1 Parent(s): c7d2e51

Upload zimg-fdloss/RFDM_REPORT.md with huggingface_hub

Browse files
Files changed (1) hide show
  1. zimg-fdloss/RFDM_REPORT.md +38 -0
zimg-fdloss/RFDM_REPORT.md CHANGED
@@ -40,6 +40,13 @@
40
  | RFDMCHc | CHAMPION-COMPOSITION control: SIMcx anchor recipe, caption prompts, D1c stats | 0.9114 | +9.81 | 0.8596 | +12.83 | 0.8098 (+3.0) | 0.7188 (+5.5) | 1.563 | 1.467 | 22.50 / 21.47 | 28.62 / 28.82 |
41
  | RFDMCHp | CHAMPION-COMPOSITION + pooled RFDM (vs CHc control) | 0.8804 | +7.31 | 0.8329 | +11.39 | 0.8249 (+4.5) | 0.7329 (+6.8) | 1.624 | 1.425 | 22.57 / 21.44 | 28.42 / 28.72 |
42
  | RFDMCHs | CHAMPION-COMPOSITION + slot RFDM (vs CHc control) | 0.9019 | +9.14 | 0.8672 | +13.25 | 0.8387 (+5.8) | 0.7698 (+9.3) | 1.585 | 1.478 | 22.50 / 21.40 | 28.32 / 28.88 |
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
43
 
44
  **P1 pooled (3 training seeds, equal-weight Stouffer) vs C0 @8: z = +11.38 (same sign 3/3: True)**
45
 
@@ -73,6 +80,16 @@
73
  - RFDMCHp vs RFDMCHc β€” champion composition: pooled RFDM on the SIMcx anchor recipe: z = -3.84@8 / -2.44@1
74
  - RFDMCHs vs RFDMCHc β€” champion composition: slot RFDM on the SIMcx anchor recipe: z = -1.21@8 / +0.48@1
75
  - RFDMCHc vs RFDMC0 β€” anchor-recipe variable alone (SIMcx anchors vs plain C0, caption prompts both): z = +9.81@8 / +12.83@1
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
76
 
77
  ## Per-tag GenEval (arm minus C0)
78
 
@@ -136,6 +153,20 @@
136
  | RFDMCHp | 1 | +0.119 | +0.293 | +0.138 | +0.144 | +0.130 | +0.215 |
137
  | RFDMCHs | 8 | +0.056 | +0.222 | +0.075 | +0.090 | +0.055 | +0.165 |
138
  | RFDMCHs | 1 | +0.137 | +0.343 | +0.188 | +0.170 | +0.185 | +0.220 |
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
139
 
140
  ## Telemetry
141
 
@@ -169,6 +200,13 @@
169
  - results/zimg/rfdm/telemetry_RFDMCHc.png
170
  - results/zimg/rfdm/telemetry_RFDMCHp.png
171
  - results/zimg/rfdm/telemetry_RFDMCHs.png
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
172
 
173
  ## Implementation report (deliverable 14)
174
 
 
40
  | RFDMCHc | CHAMPION-COMPOSITION control: SIMcx anchor recipe, caption prompts, D1c stats | 0.9114 | +9.81 | 0.8596 | +12.83 | 0.8098 (+3.0) | 0.7188 (+5.5) | 1.563 | 1.467 | 22.50 / 21.47 | 28.62 / 28.82 |
41
  | RFDMCHp | CHAMPION-COMPOSITION + pooled RFDM (vs CHc control) | 0.8804 | +7.31 | 0.8329 | +11.39 | 0.8249 (+4.5) | 0.7329 (+6.8) | 1.624 | 1.425 | 22.57 / 21.44 | 28.42 / 28.72 |
42
  | RFDMCHs | CHAMPION-COMPOSITION + slot RFDM (vs CHc control) | 0.9019 | +9.14 | 0.8672 | +13.25 | 0.8387 (+5.8) | 0.7698 (+9.3) | 1.585 | 1.478 | 22.50 / 21.40 | 28.32 / 28.88 |
43
+ | RFDMP1shuf | ATTRIBUTION: shuffled applied-field h (marginals exact, coupling destroyed) | 0.8327 | +3.56 | 0.7632 | +7.40 | 0.7841 (+1.3) | 0.7114 (+5.7) | 1.801 | 1.345 | 22.39 / 21.30 | 27.78 / 28.64 |
44
+ | RFDMP1mo | ATTRIBUTION: marginal-only field (null condition everywhere) | 0.8200 | +2.49 | 0.7135 | +3.76 | 0.7773 (+0.8) | 0.6625 (+2.1) | 1.846 | 1.360 | 22.39 / 21.45 | 27.65 / 28.69 |
45
+ | RFDMP1v2b | mismatch-law replication seed 4321 (vs C0v2) | 0.8866 | +8.29 | 0.8027 | +9.79 | 0.8019 (+3.1) | 0.6421 (+0.6) | 1.989 | 1.557 | 22.04 / 21.09 | 27.35 / 28.21 |
46
+ | RFDMS1fv2b | slot mismatch-law replication seed 4321 (vs C0v2) | 0.8422 | +4.23 | 0.7774 | +7.86 | 0.7987 (+2.5) | 0.7182 (+6.2) | 1.777 | 1.386 | 22.42 / 21.38 | 27.82 / 28.88 |
47
+ | RFDMCHcb | champion-composition control seed 4321 | 0.9029 | +9.14 | 0.8231 | +10.73 | 0.8429 (+6.0) | 0.7379 (+7.4) | 1.613 | 1.445 | 22.48 / 21.42 | 28.19 / 29.07 |
48
+ | RFDMCHpb | champion-comp + pooled RFDM seed 4321 (vs CHcb) | 0.8521 | +5.05 | 0.7365 | +5.11 | 0.8001 (+2.5) | 0.6774 (+3.0) | 1.710 | 1.468 | 22.33 / 21.18 | 27.71 / 28.26 |
49
+ | RFDMCHsb | champion-comp + slot RFDM seed 4321 (vs CHcb) | 0.9001 | +9.09 | 0.8095 | +10.27 | 0.8505 (+6.7) | 0.7411 (+7.4) | 1.505 | 1.441 | 22.51 / 21.38 | 28.21 / 28.85 |
50
 
51
  **P1 pooled (3 training seeds, equal-weight Stouffer) vs C0 @8: z = +11.38 (same sign 3/3: True)**
52
 
 
80
  - RFDMCHp vs RFDMCHc β€” champion composition: pooled RFDM on the SIMcx anchor recipe: z = -3.84@8 / -2.44@1
81
  - RFDMCHs vs RFDMCHc β€” champion composition: slot RFDM on the SIMcx anchor recipe: z = -1.21@8 / +0.48@1
82
  - RFDMCHc vs RFDMC0 β€” anchor-recipe variable alone (SIMcx anchors vs plain C0, caption prompts both): z = +9.81@8 / +12.83@1
83
+ - RFDMP1shuf vs RFDMP1a β€” ATTRIBUTION: shuffled-pairing field vs proper (coupling load-bearing?): z = -3.52@8 / -1.52@1
84
+ - RFDMP1shuf vs RFDMC0 β€” shuffled-pairing field vs control (does it still create?): z = +3.56@8 / +7.40@1
85
+ - RFDMP1mo vs RFDMP1a β€” ATTRIBUTION: marginal-only field vs proper conditional: z = -4.40@8 / -4.89@1
86
+ - RFDMP1mo vs RFDMC0 β€” marginal-only field vs control (does a pure marginal flow field create?): z = +2.49@8 / +3.76@1
87
+ - RFDMP1mo vs RFDMP1bind β€” marginal-only vs binding-residual (the D_0-vs-(D_c-D_0) decomposition): z = -4.58@8 / -5.47@1
88
+ - RFDMP1v2b vs RFDMC0v2 β€” mismatch-law seed 2 vs its v2 control: z = +2.14@8 / +1.06@1
89
+ - RFDMS1fv2b vs RFDMC0v2 β€” slot mismatch-law seed 2 vs its v2 control: z = -2.64@8 / -0.90@1
90
+ - RFDMCHpb vs RFDMCHcb β€” champion pooled graft seed 2 (seed-matched control): z = -4.83@8 / -6.10@1
91
+ - RFDMCHsb vs RFDMCHcb β€” champion slot graft seed 2 (seed-matched control): z = -0.32@8 / -1.24@1
92
+ - RFDMCHcb vs RFDMCHc β€” champion control seed spread: z = -1.12@8 / -3.38@1
93
 
94
  ## Per-tag GenEval (arm minus C0)
95
 
 
153
  | RFDMCHp | 1 | +0.119 | +0.293 | +0.138 | +0.144 | +0.130 | +0.215 |
154
  | RFDMCHs | 8 | +0.056 | +0.222 | +0.075 | +0.090 | +0.055 | +0.165 |
155
  | RFDMCHs | 1 | +0.137 | +0.343 | +0.188 | +0.170 | +0.185 | +0.220 |
156
+ | RFDMP1shuf | 8 | +0.025 | +0.101 | -0.013 | +0.080 | -0.010 | +0.065 |
157
+ | RFDMP1shuf | 1 | +0.081 | +0.167 | +0.038 | +0.069 | +0.075 | +0.190 |
158
+ | RFDMP1mo | 8 | -0.019 | +0.066 | -0.019 | +0.069 | -0.005 | +0.080 |
159
+ | RFDMP1mo | 1 | +0.037 | +0.121 | -0.037 | +0.085 | +0.000 | +0.115 |
160
+ | RFDMP1v2b | 8 | +0.037 | +0.197 | +0.044 | +0.058 | +0.070 | +0.165 |
161
+ | RFDMP1v2b | 1 | +0.081 | +0.268 | +0.075 | +0.133 | +0.155 | +0.145 |
162
+ | RFDMS1fv2b | 8 | +0.031 | +0.066 | +0.019 | +0.080 | +0.020 | +0.090 |
163
+ | RFDMS1fv2b | 1 | +0.075 | +0.207 | +0.031 | +0.106 | +0.130 | +0.155 |
164
+ | RFDMCHcb | 8 | +0.062 | +0.162 | +0.069 | +0.117 | +0.085 | +0.175 |
165
+ | RFDMCHcb | 1 | +0.106 | +0.268 | +0.106 | +0.144 | +0.130 | +0.225 |
166
+ | RFDMCHpb | 8 | +0.037 | +0.136 | +0.000 | +0.096 | -0.035 | +0.130 |
167
+ | RFDMCHpb | 1 | +0.000 | +0.162 | +0.044 | +0.069 | +0.000 | +0.185 |
168
+ | RFDMCHsb | 8 | +0.062 | +0.152 | +0.062 | +0.106 | +0.075 | +0.195 |
169
+ | RFDMCHsb | 1 | +0.081 | +0.253 | +0.131 | +0.122 | +0.110 | +0.200 |
170
 
171
  ## Telemetry
172
 
 
200
  - results/zimg/rfdm/telemetry_RFDMCHc.png
201
  - results/zimg/rfdm/telemetry_RFDMCHp.png
202
  - results/zimg/rfdm/telemetry_RFDMCHs.png
203
+ - results/zimg/rfdm/telemetry_RFDMP1shuf.png
204
+ - results/zimg/rfdm/telemetry_RFDMP1mo.png
205
+ - results/zimg/rfdm/telemetry_RFDMP1v2b.png
206
+ - results/zimg/rfdm/telemetry_RFDMS1fv2b.png
207
+ - results/zimg/rfdm/telemetry_RFDMCHcb.png
208
+ - results/zimg/rfdm/telemetry_RFDMCHpb.png
209
+ - results/zimg/rfdm/telemetry_RFDMCHsb.png
210
 
211
  ## Implementation report (deliverable 14)
212