Pearson Correlation Loss in paper or code

Hi, I found that the Pearson Correlation Loss of paper and code is inconsistent.
in paper:

in code:

Lines 105 to 108 in 8c2e181

    
           depth_loss = min( 
        
                           (1 - pearson_corrcoef( - midas_depth, rendered_depth)), 
        
                           (1 - pearson_corrcoef(1 / (midas_depth + 200.), rendered_depth)) 
        
           )

Yes it makes me confused.

I am also curious about this.

The author has answered this question in issues/1

Hi guys, I'm still confused.

the inverse depth means if the real depths is 50m, the inverse depth will be 1/50; but why - midas_depth in the code?
the equation in the paper is: Corr(D_ras, D_est), which is implemented by pearson_corrcoef. The pearson_corr_coef is the same as the eq in the paper.

but the code is 1 - pearson_corrcoef.
cc @zehaozhu @henrypearce4D @zhiwenfan

	depth_loss = min(
	(1 - pearson_corrcoef( - midas_depth, rendered_depth)),
	(1 - pearson_corrcoef(1 / (midas_depth + 200.), rendered_depth))
	)