> > slight difference in a single point(0.5) is fine and likely won’t have an > > impact on final acc > > Yeah, I was planning to add a rounding param to the op. For "ceil", we could > just add a 0.5 rounding without worrying about negative values. For "round', > we can be more precise. By default, we can choose "ceil". What do you think? > > Update - Maybe not, "ceil" is confusing. Let me think and come up with better > terms (like round-away-from-zero etc.).
If your round is the concept of my previous comment, maybe `round` is better and is the same as TFLite. IMO, if we couldn't get the same result of TFLite, we can not know where is wrong when the model is large and we could have problem when we deploy it in industry environment. Because algo. team often verify acc in TFLite, not verify the acc in TVM. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/dmlc/tvm/issues/2351#issuecomment-509077139
