From ea64fe83bd495b5265fbe14b5c0b46e1a51431e5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: nagadomi Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2016 10:17:19 +0900 Subject: [PATCH] Update benchmark.md --- appendix/benchmark.md | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/appendix/benchmark.md b/appendix/benchmark.md index a8f5408..a7df0b5 100644 --- a/appendix/benchmark.md +++ b/appendix/benchmark.md @@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ ## Photo -Note: waifu2x's photo models was trained on the blend dataset of [kou's photo collection](http://photosku.com/photo/category/%E6%92%AE%E5%BD%B1%E8%80%85/kou/) and [ukbench](http://vis.uky.edu/~stewe/ukbench/). +Note: waifu2x's photo models was trained on the blending dataset of [kou's photo collection](http://photosku.com/photo/category/%E6%92%AE%E5%BD%B1%E8%80%85/kou/) and [ukbench](http://vis.uky.edu/~stewe/ukbench/). Note: PSNR in this benchmark uses a [MATLAB's rgb2ycbcr](https://jp.mathworks.com/help/images/ref/rgb2ycbcr.html?lang=en) compatible function (dynamic range [16 235], not [0 255]) for converting grayscale image. I think it's not correct PSNR. But many paper used this metric.