[rework] rework w/ paper list about awesome-gans HOT 3 OPEN

Agreed, but the problem is that more and more papers are coming out, especially with the recorrection with https://github.com/nightrome/really-awesome-gan
Is it possible to judge a paper based on the amount of times it get referenced by other papers (assume metrics by SemanticScholar and ResearchGate)?

from awesome-gans.

Agreed, but the problem is that more and more papers are coming out, especially with the recorrection with https://github.com/nightrome/really-awesome-gan
Is it possible to judge a paper based on the amount of times it get referenced by other papers (assume metrics by SemanticScholar and ResearchGate)?

reference count usually is a good metric for judging the paper, but in case of purpose of this repo, is not as i think!
so, not recommending all of GAN papers, but the paper what i and others think it is good to read ( based on my and others experiences).

from awesome-gans.

In that case, besides popularity, there should be a "uniqueness" factor, since many GANs can be abstracted away to having the same meta-structure. See #18 for some examples.
Of course I would hope that more varieties of meta-structures would lead to more innovation, but then again that is just hope if implementing all GANs are impossible.

from awesome-gans.