4.5.2. Individual Evaluation
LTTR24 Base Model
The model’s variant, trained on 500
epochs, provided the
best results on all three efforts at aesthetics heuristics. The version
on 300
epochs performed slightly better results than on 600
epochs on detail precision and alphabet consistency.
The number of generated samples has not produced significantly different results across all the epoch variants.

DeepVecFont-2 Original Model
In the experiment, only one model’s version was tested. Therefore, training effort results were not evaluated.

From the inference effort perspective, the Reference matching
heuristic does seem to provide some difference, where 50
and 100
generated samples provided better results than
20
and 30
generated samples. However, this
difference could be questionable.

DeepVecFont-2 Fine-tuned on the LTTRSET Dataset
In the detail precision criterion, the model’s variant trained on
800
epochs performed slightly better results than the
1000
epochs variant. However, the difference is not
significant and can be prone to subjective judgement bias.

The reference matching performance seems to be for both variants seem to be similar. In the alphabet consistency criterion, the 1000 epochs variant achieved slightly better results.

LTTR24 Fine-tuned on the SVG-Font Dataset
The model’s variant, trained on 1100
epochs, provided
the best results on all three efforts at aesthetics heuristics. The
version on the 1200
epochs performed slightly worse
results. The 800
and 1000
epochs variant
generated strange images that don’t even look like letters.
The number of generated samples has not produced significantly different results across all the epoch variants.
