-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4
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
Implementation plan #10
Comments
Thanks. |
Thanks you both. I am looking forward to your progress. |
IntroWaveRNN use GRU operation optimization techniques. I had compared Pythorch's built-in GRU module with self implementation of GRU operation optimization Experimental setupI made a simple two-dimensional coordinate prediction problem, f(x_i) = y = x_(i+1), ImplementationBuilt-in GRU module Experimental resultI performed full batch inferences, 10000 times each. Built-in GRU module: 6.02 seconds The pytorch build-in GRU module is well optimized. ConclusionIn my opinion, it's faster to use built-in GRU in pytorch. |
Thanks for the experiment. Unfortunately I'm in hospital and couldn't continue to integrate the original wavernn implementation for now, but it's still on my agenda. |
I'm trying to use faster wave generator, which is waveglow. |
Perhaps this post is interesting for you: mozilla/TTS#9 (comment) |
I'll close this for now. |
Data feeding
[ ] using parameters in hparam.py to reduce independent parameters (3rd)[ ] muLaw quantization to preserve more important information (4th)Model
modifying the wavernn model to reduce matrix multiflications (1st, ~ 11.04) (Fail)11.1111.14)[ ] weight sparsification to reduce computation times (2nd, ~11.16)The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: