5 ms·
Do they say how much time is the generation taking? Is this insanely slow to train but extremely fast to do generation?
by fastoptimizer 10y ago
Do they say how much time is the generation taking?
Is this insanely slow to train but extremely fast to do generation?
- georgehm 10y ago"After training, we can sample the network to generate synthetic utterances. At each step during sampling a value is drawn from the probability distribution computed by the network. This value is then fed back into the input and a new prediction for the next step is made. Building up samples one step at a time like this is computationally expensive, but we have found it essential for generating complex, realistic-sounding audio." So it looks like generation is a slow process.
- kastnerkyle 10y agoRelatively, training is fast (due to parallelism / masking so you don't have to sample during training) but during generation sampling is a sequential process. They talk about it a bit in the previous papers for PixelCNN and PixelRNN.
- lucb1e 10y agoI was wondering the same. They don't mention anything about how long it took on what kind of system. Even for a first beta it would give us some ballpark idea of how slow it is -- because it's clearly slow, they just keep back how slow exactly, so it's probably bad.
- microtherion 10y agoAccording to 3rd hand reports I've heard (apply copious amounts of salt), it may take 1 hour of CPU time to generate 1 second of speech.